Time Is Here

Fifty thousand trucks have settled themselves in Ottawa... Canada, that is, of all places.  Unlikely as that may seem to some, this is where the nexus of humanity and its innate, natural, and rightful freedom has broken the surface in a way I was unsure I'd ever see.

I have read that there are now half a million people connected to this protest in Ottawa, against the tyrannies of the endlessly corrupt Canadian "government", which makes this event non-trivial in the global context, so much more that of Canada.

Justin Trudeau has thus far acquitted himself in the poorest imaginable fashion, which should endlessly please everyone of good character.  Faced with the choice between hearing what the truckers have to say, and reacting like a wholesale despot, Trudeau chose the latter as he finally emerged from the sad little bunker to which he'd fled at the outset.  His reaction was to offer naught but threats and promises of criminal violence against those who dared question his unilateral edicts.  Having invoked "emergency powers", Trudeau has effectively declared martial law in Canada, himself emperor, and has by his lone hand criminalized all activities related to advancing the protest cause.  Trudeau has single-handedly declared the truckers as "terrorists" and has pronounced all aid to them as crimes, regardless of source.  

As if all that were not enough tyranty stuff to fill Trudeau's sottish, gas-inflated ego, he has further qualified himself as a foot-stamping little corporal by authorizing Canadian banks to seize the accounts of anyone or any entity so much as suspected of aiding the protesters.  The significance of this move would be difficult to overstate, as it is overt, bald-faced despotism that cannot in any way be credibly justified or otherwise explained away as not being old world styled repression.  In a way I find this very surprising, as the tyrannies of the "west" have been very soft in character since the end of World War II.  This is surprising because soft tyranny has proven so thoroughly successful over the past six or seven decades, leading one to wonder why this sudden stab backwards into so obviously totalitarian a move.  On the surface, it makes little sense, save that Trudeau is a true political imbecile.

Many will deplore Trudeau's admittedly rueful reaction to valid protest, but in point of fact we should all be beering it up in righteous and joyful celebration.   The cause here is that wittingly or otherwise,   Trudeau has painted himself into a very tight corner by acting as an amateurishly transparent oppressor.  In responding as he has, Trudeau has cut himself off from all other options apart from either his violent promises made manifest, or a crushing defeat in having to step off because he has thrown down the gauntlet, effectively declaring war on the protesters, and could not make good as dictator.  He could not have responded better than this, from the standpoint of pushing the central issue that has needed to come to the fore now for many long years.  He has narrowed his options to two: escalate into violence, or capitulate and look more the fool than he does now.  Either way, he loses.

The question of basic human freedom has now come under attack in the ostensibly "free" world in a way so blatant that nobody can credibly dress this third world tactic in a way that will make it appear as anything other than what it is.  And so with this development, which at first may have seemed not quite significant, an opportunity that may never again present itself has arisen in a most prominent manner.

Between the large-scale refusal of common men to be further abused by the cookie-cutter globalist runts, and the uncharacteristically foolish response of a third-rate, low-rent^†.  autocrat, a door of opportunity has swung wide for not only the Canadians, but a vast swath of humanity that could conceivably encompass even the Chinese.  We must force Theire hand.  Force it and keep forcing it until THEYE make the choice that WE impose on THEM.  We can do this.  We could stop Themme dead in their tracks, one way or the other, but we have to get a sense of what is needed, which really not much more than an utter and intransigent refusal to cooperate, and the will to stick with it to the better end, no matter what.

The question of liberty and the rights that follow most naturally, logically, and undeniably therefrom has come to the fore with unexpected clarity and force.  That question has been further put into type, italicized, bolded, and underscored by the wonderfully careless and myopically fumbled response of a true political nitwit, Justin Trudeau.  Perhaps most significantly, this wild blunder has come off not in some third-world backwater where the people of the "west" have come to expect such rank evil, but in their own house, where it has been blatantly turned on them in a way many have foolishly believed not possible.

I cannot overemphasize the significance of this turn of events, come what may.  If we allow this opportunity to pass, humanity stands to remain indefinitely in the New Dark Age in which it finds itself.  But if we see this development as a once in a thousand generations chance to set tyranny back on its heels and we decide to seize the opportunity and see it to its logical end, the quality of our lives could change immeasurably for the better.  That choice is the nexus to which I refer.  A gift of choice that I never thought to see in my lifetime has fallen into humanity's lap, as if by some dint of the Miraculous.  

A CHOICE.  When was the last time we saw a choice presented to us that rested beyond which laundry detergent, beer, pornographic production, or feminine hygiene product we might select for ourselves?

Time is here, and it is now.  If we fritter this away, our posterity will rue our decision.  WE will ultimately rue it because so far as I can see, the global Despot has shown his true face, whether by intention, or the feckless blundering of a nincompoop.  It has happened, it is fact, and I am not nearly convinced that Theye can now go back to things as they were, pre-covid.  Neither am I nearly certain that Theye wish to go back.  The gloves seem to be coming off and that puts the ball in our court: accede to the whim and caprice of the Tyrant, or stand firm, no matter what.

Be aware that in this endeavor, half-measures will avail us nothing, save the same end we would find if we  were to capitulate upfront.  We are at the doorstep of an all-or-nothing struggle where Theye are playing for keeps.  The only unanswered question is whether we, too, are playing in the same earnest devotion to our liberties as Theye are to our effective destruction.  Do not step up unless you intend on going all the way because there are no waypoints between here and there.

Finally, loathe as I am to give advice, I will do so this time by stating that the only correct answer in all this is to sign on against tyranny and give to the cause of freedom more and better than everything you've got.  The chances are that nobody alive today will ever again see such an opportunity.  Please don't allow this to simply fade into nothing.  Grab the chance to put the Tyrant down like the rabid beast that he is.  We don't have to become violent.  We just need enough of us to refuse cooperation.  If violence is to come, make Themme fire the first shots.  Never before has civil disobedience been more important.  Stand up and tell Themme "NO!"  I promise that it will make your life better than it is now, no matter how things work out.

Be well, and until next time, please accept my best wishes.

† I wanted to use "cheap suit", but could not in all good conscience do so because dopey and despotic trash that he may be, Trudeau's suits are simply impeccably tailored, almost as good as my own.  Credit where due, even for cheap scoundrels.

There's Inflation And Then There's Inflation.

Today we will address "inflation", the great. nemesis of economist and politician alike, not to mention the great wallet-rapist.

Before we can speak intelligently on the matter, it would seem fair to consult the dictionary in order that we may understand the meaning of "inflation".  To wit:

dictionary.com:  

 

inflation, noun

1. Economics. a persistent, substantial rise in the general level of prices related to an increase in the volume of money and resulting in the loss of value of currency (opposed to deflation).

Mirriam-Webster:

2: a continuing rise in the general price level usually attributed to an increase in the volume of money and credit relative to available goods and services.

 

wikipedia:

In economics, inflation refers to a general progressive increase in prices of goods and services in an economy.  When the general price level rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services; consequently, inflation corresponds to a reduction in the purchasing power of money.

As we can see, these definitions are neither very technical, nor are they rigorous.  They do, however, offer enough for the purposes of this discussion.  Almost.

The problem with most definitions of "inflation" is that they address only the most broad sense of its effect: the loss of purchasing power as made manifest by rising prices.  What they do not explain are the reasons for it, a problem we shall remedy forthwith.

To begin with, you should be made aware that in general there exist two basic sorts of inflation, each stemming from different causes and usually manifesting slightly differently in ways that are important to understand.

The two broadest categories of inflation are monetary and push-pull.

Monetary Inflation

So-called "monetary" inflation is more accurately termed "currency inflation" because the nations of the earth no longer use money, but only mere currency, the differences being fundamental, very significant, and constituting a discussion for another time.  The cause of currency inflation is the generation of ever higher volumes of currency.  But what does that actually mean?  Glad you asked.

Imagine a simple economy which has 100 units of commodities in its market, and 1000 units of currency in the hands of the people who constitute that market.  A simplistic statistical view of this arrangement might say that on average, for each item available for sale, there exists ten units of currency with which to purchase those commodities.  The imporant idea here is to realize that there is some notion of a ratio between what is available for purchase and the currency available for making a purchase.

If my some magical means we suddenly find our economy "blessed" with 2000 units of currency (yay, we're rich!), the ratio of commodities to currency has now halved from 1:10, to 1:20.  While this may superficially seem a good thing, there is a <AHEM...> price to pay for this turn of fortune, both literally and figuratively.  Now that people have twice the amount of cash in their wallets, what will they do with it all?  Save it, or spend?  Once again, keeping things simplistic, the tendency is to spend and in our little economy that is precisely what people do.  The deterrent to spending, which was the 1000 unit cap on available money, economy-wide, has been raised to twice its value, meaning a lowered deterrent.  People now feel freer to spend, and that tends to be precisely what they do.

As spending rises, the supply of available commodities falls and in classical economic fashion due to what must inevitably become competition between buyers for that which is available, prices rise.  This phenomenon is as predictable as the sunrise.  

Now, we all know that all else equal, when demand rises, producers will increase output, which tends to minimize inflationary increases, but we often still experience momentary increases in pricing until supply can catch up with demand, which leads us to the other type of inflation.

Push-Pull Inflation

The other type of inflation to which economies may be subjected is what I call "push-pull".  There are other names for it, but let us stick with this to keep things once again simple.  Push-pull inflation refers to the causes and consequences of supply and demand. 

Imagine once again a simple market within our economy, that for widgets of which there are 10 units available per unit of time and a consumption rate of 10 units per unit of time.  In other words, the push (supply) side and the pull (demand) side are in equilibrium. Let us further say that the current going price of a widget is 2 units of currency.  

A change in the push-side circumstance leading to a decrease in the number of available widgets will cause stresses in the pull-side of the economy.  The same number of people will be competing for a decreased number of widgets.  The same result is realized when the demand for widgets rises, once again illustrating how the ratio of demand-to-supply is the key factor in determining price in this type of inflation.  

A fine real-world example can be seen in the precious metals markets from a few decades ago when several of the largest platinum mines in South Africa were taken offline for necessary upgrading.  When the mines announced the projected five-year shut downs, Japanese car manufacturers immediately begain buying up ever scrap of rhodium on which they could get their hands on in anticipation of shortages.  Rhodium is a byproduct of platinum mining and is essential to the production of catalytic converters as the actual catalyst.  No catalyst, no converter.  No converter, no can sell cars in first-world markets.  No sell cars, no eat supper or pay mortgage.  This was a very big deal.

Because of this precipitous rise in demand, the price of rhodium shot up from $900/ozt to over $27K/ozt!

To make this example even more perfectly illustrative, when the mines announced their reopening two years earlier than predicted, the price of rhodium fell through the floor even more quickly than it had risen, and many people lost their shirts in the deal, which further teaches us that it is unwise to speculate in precious metals markets, especially under such conditions.

As the supply-to-demand ratio lowers, prices rise (inflation).  If the ratio rises (increased supply-to-demand), prices tend to fall (deflation).

So What's The Difference?

If the net effect of inflation is increased prices regardless of cause, then why should we be concerned with the differences in those causes?  Precisely this: the tendency with push-pull inflation is to be momentary with eventual correction to normal, all else equal.  Free markets by their nature tend to adjust to the vicissitudes of supply and demand.  Any sudden and sharp changes in either supply, demand, or both tends to lead to changes in prices, but these changes tend to be narrow in effect, though that is not always the case.  

For example, if there is a sudden drop in the availability of Unobtainium, the raw material from which widgets are made, the price of widgets will rise, but the price of milk and bread are likely to remain unmoved.  If, on the other hand, the economy finds itself suddenly short of crude oil, the effects may be far more widespread because petroleum is a far more basic commodity than is Unobtainum. While the one effects only the production of widgets, the other makes itself felt in plastics, energy, lubricants, transportation, fertilizers, pharmaceuticals, and a host of other areas.

But on the whole, push-pull inflations do tend to be far less deeply and widely felt, and tend to correct themselves over time.

Currency inflation, on the other hand, tends to be very long term at best, and is most often permanent with far broader and deeper effects because the currency touches quite literally every corner of the economy.  One thing that should be understood here is that currency is also a commodity.  It is, in fact, the universal commodity.  In this respect, its effects are very much like that of physical market commodities such as Ubobtainium and petroleum, and we can now clearly see then that the ratio of the universal commodity to the demand side is crucial to the state of prices in the economy.  As that ratio rises (supply goes up), it's price (effective value) falls in perfect harmony with the theory of supply and demand.  The value of a unit of currency is directly tied to its ability to purchase, say, a widget.  The more units required per widget, the lower the value per unit currency.

The reason currency inflation tends toward the permanent is because money supplies rarely contract.  Once generated and released into the wild, a unit of currency becomes somewhat difficult to retrieve, mainly because people generally do not much cotton to giving up their cash for nothing in return, which is the very definition of theft, and which is why people are typically unhappy about taxation.  Imagine that.

It ain't rocket surgery.

And So Summing It All Up...

We now understand the two basic categories of inflation and how they tend to effect prices.  We have learned that it's really all about relative values as expressed in the ratios of things like units of currency available for spending in the context of given amounts of available commodities for purchase.  We have noted that with push-pull inflation the rises in price tend to be momentary and narrowly applied, whereas with currency inflation the rise in prices tends toward the very long term or permanency and hits the economy universally, leaving no market untouched.

And so we can now readily see that when the great intellects of "government" begin churning out currency in the ways we have been witnessing with the central banks like the Federal Reserve, it is no wonder that the currency inflation has been so high over the past century, especially after nations abandoned the so-called "gold standard" where a unit of paper currency actually represented a corresponding unit of physical gold, which for example was the original definition of a "dollar".

I will finish by stating without the least trace of equivocation that currency inflation serves you no whit of good, especially if you have cash savings.  Currency inflation is always induced and has, along with outright taxation, been a primary means of stealing away the accumulated wealth of presumably hard-working and honest people.  This is a topic all its own and has been covered extensively by others far better qualified to expound on the matter than am I.

It is my wish that you will come away from this little discussion a little more smartly aware than you were prior and that this knowledge with serve to motivate you to make better educated choices based on improved views on the matter at hand and that you will realize the import of these issues.  Discuss them with your families, friends, and anyone else who will listen, for this is the brand of information of which Theye are well pleased to have you remain ignorant.

Don't let Themme win.  We still retain the ability to throw the vampires from out necks, but it isn't going to happen by itself and you can be damned certain that there is no cavalry on its way to save the day.  We either save ourselves by coming together as Freemen watching each others' backs as effective covers of our own, or we sit idly, perhaps wringing our hands as the Tyrant closes the noose we have allowed him to place around our necks.

Give it all some good thought, and here's to hoping you come to the good conclusions and decisions.

Until next time, please accept my best wishes.

The Chinese Labor Trap

The flight of American manufacturing to China represents a colossal failure of creative thought and, perhaps more significantly, effort... not to mention basic intelligence.

When the cheap slave labor of China was dangled before stupid American businessmen as so much obvious bait, it was snapped up rapidly with no apparent thought to the strategic implications of acceptance.

Like a horde of cow-eyed idiot-children, boards of directors flashed to accept the shiny objects held out to them, failing to consider that those false jewels were resting in the maw of the largest economic trap of all human history. Those people CHOSE to naively accept the Chinese promise of increased profits, etc., with no regard to the broader economic and political implications of placing one's own testes into the hands of a smiling, reassuring, yet bitterly covetous enemy.

The failure of intellect, care, regard, and moral sense must rank in the top three since the days of Sumer. We have not only abandoned our own better interests by investing so much as a penny into the Chinese economy, we have aided and abetted the raving evil that is the Chinese government in the industrialized enslavement of their own people.

It may now be too late to repair to better circumstances. The economics of our foolishness having shifted so fundamentally in a direction that superficially appears an improvement, it has in fact proven the handing over of our own economy to a dangerous adversary. The CCP is keen on seeing America neutralized and perhaps even eventually conquered in some manner and degree, That seemingly unlikely reality can be well argued as already having occurred.

I contend that it lies in America's interests to abandon China, if it is in any way economically feasible, and return to a more vertically integrated economy. The lie of global interdependence, replete with its concomitant sub-lies such as just-in-time inventory, are all very appealing on their surfaces, but they operate on the grand assumption of everything remaining hunky dory between potential enemies. This is not commonly paid due attention in the business schools, this single underlying assumption that ignores the very real politics that underpins most economic reality. This grand lie of global economic harmony between happy workers waving their little red books and their foreign counterparts and consumers is so glaringly flawed as to defy belief that anyone with a shred of sense would forward such an absurdity. Add to that the failure of American businesses to stockpile strategically vital resources in anticipation of hard times due to the beguiling lie of "just in time" inventory, and you have basically chosen to play Russian roulette with all six chambers loaded.

Neutralizing the labor cost advantage of Chinese slave workers is key to the extrication of America's head from China's ravening and rabies-contaminated jaws. Tariffing Chinese imports would seem the only viable way toward repatriation of American businesses. The economic forces are just too powerful to do it any other way, barring some quantum advance in manufacturing technology that would itself serve to render China economically irrelevant to broader global economic interests. THAT is the creative American genius that appears to have vanished in the wake of foolishly misguided visions of unprecedented profit, as if such extreme transformations occur without commensurate cost in some other form. There are no free lunches, a maxim the great tycoons of the 1980s willfully abandoned for the sake of a necessarily temporary competitive advantage.

China must be thrown off, or we will be inevitably consumed by their soulless regime, which I suspect is the Chinese objective for America and much of the rest of the world.

Finally, as China cannot maintain the same slave labor rates indefinitely, Chinese wages have risen and will almost certainly continue to rise. This spells eventual doom for American manufacturers who relied so heavily on what was essentially free labor for their competitive advantage and the ability of offer those low low KMart prices. So what then, once the labor cost advantage is wiped out to the degree that it is no longer even worthy of the mention? The prices everyone sought so frenetically will be history and we will all be paying the same old high prices regardless of country of origin. The trap will have been sprung and we stand to be stuck in it. I suppose we might be able to extricate ourselves, but consider the waste it all represents, not to mention the dangers.

It will be interesting to observe how this evolves over, say, the coming decade or so. One cannot predict what the future will hold, save to say that things will change as they always do.

Good luck and keep your chins up, for all is not yet lost

Until next time please accept my best wishes.

The Curse Of Mediocrity

Today it is my intention to wax a mite stridently opinionated on matters that may not seem to have much to do with freedom, but actually do. Proper human freedom requires much of men, including intelligence, smarts, generosity, honor, courage, and a whole host of other characteristics that many neither possess nor have any interest in acquiring.

I must beg your patience and indulgence for my little vent. Thank you in advance.

Planned obsolescence strikes me as a colossal failure of creative thinking. It reminds me of the Patent Office official who resigned because he had decided there was no point in continuing because everything that could be invented, had been.


I saw this brand of failure daily and for forty years had to deal with it in my profession (software/business R&D) and the fact that it is so interminably widespread leaves my brain numb. Far too many people are far too willing to simply give up.


On the one hand is the vulgar man whose dullardly lack of creative imagination and drive befouls the earth. On the other, we see his diametric opposite: those who press on regardless, working each problem as it arises, perceiving them as challenges and puzzles to me met and solved, rather than causes to quit.

The engineers at Chrysler in the 1960s were such men. When the Hemi came on to the NASCAR scene, ca 1964, they crushed the competition. NASCAR, being an example of the dullard, imposed restrictor plates on the hemis to reduce mass flow into the cylinders.


Undeterred, the Chrysler engineers worked the problem to the point that the engines produced more power with the restrictor plates, than without, leading said dullards at NASCAR to ban the Hemi outright. This is the way of the common-as-dirt human world, where the mean man - the inarticulate mob of mediocrity - hates the superior man because of the shame to which their betters put them. And so the excellent, if they become too excellent, must be shouted down. A fine example of this is a passage in the novel "Shibumi" by Trevanian, ca. page 108 where the General speaks to Nikolai on this very point. The one paragraph alone makes the entire book worth the reading.  To wit:

“Your scorn for mediocrity blinds you to its vast primitive power. You stand in the glare of your own brilliance, unable to see into the dim corners of the room, to dilate your eyes and see the potential dangers of the mass, the wad of humanity. Even as I tell you this, dear student, you cannot quite believe that lesser men, in whatever numbers, can really defeat you. But we are in the age of the mediocre man. He is dull, colorless, boring — but inevitably victorious. The amoeba outlives the tiger because it divides and continues in its immortal monotony. The masses are the final tyrants. See how, in the arts, Kabuki wanes and withers while popular novels of violence and mindless action swamp the mind of the mass reader. And even in that timid genre, no author dares to produce a genuinely superior man as his hero, for in his rage of shame the mass man will send his yojimbo, the critic, to defend him. The roar of the plodders is inarticulate, but deafening. They have no brain, but they have a thousand arms to grasp and clutch at you, drag you down.” 

True excellence is hated by lesser men stemming from the shame of the mediocre man who understands his willful insufficiency, even if only unconsciously.

In his book "Zen And The Art Of Motorcycle Maintenance", Robert Pirsig makes valid and eminently worthwhile arguments concerning not only the nature of quality, but its lasting and forward-looking value.  His other truly significant point lies in the emphasis on the development of rhetorical skill in the individual, the single most important capability any human being has ever acquired, or ever will.  The stronger the rhetorical skill of a man, the more powerfully is he able to reason.  The significance of this cannot be overstated.  The tome is very much worth the reading and I recommend it to anyone seeking deeper truth.

Obsolescence in many areas comes naturally as new technologies emerge. There is nothing wrong with this, and it has in fact brought many good things into our lives. But the mindset that intentionally designs and builds junk, either in the morbidly mis-proportioned  pursuit of profit or the anticipation of new technologies to come is a cancer that should, and indeed one day may, be excised. Looking back to the days when General Motors started down the path of this rotten and ultimately myopic world view of quality, the consumer was very naive, and understandably so. The result was unspeakable waste, but today we can no longer afford to be so spendthrift in our habits, and because of all this the consumer is beginning to push back, which is a good thing.

Consumers are tired of the junk coming to them from places like China.  And yet, they remain reticent to pay more for articles of higher quality.  This is a very big problem, but perhaps with sufficient disappointment may come a change in those attitudes.

Old habits die hard and that of our miserable paucity in creative problem solving remains stubbornly ensconced in the minds of those whose very livelihoods are centered on finding better solutions to the challenges of providing for a growing world, the process of which places ever greater stresses upon resources. We can no longer afford such failshort habits. Time to find our love of true excellence, rather than the low-standards that have hitherto been mislabeled as such. Time to grow up.

Be well, pardon my rant, and until next time please accept my best wishes.

Kill The Tyrant

How do we effectively neuter the Tyrant without resorting to open war as the party to fire the first shot?

How do we reduce the Tyrant to irrelevancy?

In a word, we starve him out. 

It is quite that simple, if not quite that easy. 

To wit, we:

1. Pay him no heed or tribute, effectively ostracizing him by simply turning our backs to him
2. Resist him at every turn through non-compliance with his command; make him sweat and toil maximally for his every violation, giving no quarter such that his wretched existence becomes a misery of toil with every breath and twitch of his rotted mind.
3. Defy him openly, head high so he knows he is flouted, which tends to enrage him.  Feed that rage until either he quits in frustration, or looses his dogs.  Either way, he loses.
4. Show him naught but utter, cold, scientific indifference, for that is one of the greatest weapons one has over an enemy. In so doing, the Tyrant is diminished by his own hand, as we cause his sick mind to act against his own interests.  We become as a great black hole, giving him nothing whatsoever in return for his foot-stamping edicts and tantrums.  He destroys himself, the beauty in it being that it all transpires in his own mind, the bad place being the only one where such people ever go because it is the only place they can go.  That inevitability leads him to consume himself.

Make the Tyrant sweat blood for every trespass he commits against you and your fellows. Defend the rights of all men, even those who curse and disparage you. Always be the better man.  Always be better than the Tyrant and his rotten lackeys.

Make the price of playing his cheap game so high, the Tyrant comes to hate his days for the anguish of his interminable frustrations and outlays. Leave him unable to enjoy the ill-gotten fruits of his felonious labors.  Become obstreperous and intractable to all who forget themselves and so foolishly choose the path of the Despot and his oppressions.

Never forget that the Tyrant cannot succeed without the willing cooperation of those upon whom he directs his crimes. When enough of us stop obeying, turning our backs upon him and his petty tantrums, he will become an embarrassment to himself before the world, forcing him to that nexus where he must choose to step aside, tail tucked, or escalate to physical violence. Either way, we win. 

Either the Tyrant recedes into ignominy as he diminishes and disparages himself in the effective admission of his status as a self-mocking disgrace to Existence itself, or makes his ultimate error in escalating to open, physical violence. In the latter case, we then strike the life from the Felon and his lackeys, relegating them to the dustbin of history as just another coterie of anonymous scoundrels who met their condign ends at the hands of Freemen who would not be abused.

The only way we lose is by aiding and abetting the Tyrant's crimes against us, thereby defeating ourselves through our continued obedience.

That these artlessly ham-fisted examples of feckless humanity have succeeded so wildly, stands as glaring testament to what utter failures we have all of us been.  We should all burn with shame, that those boobs have managed such domnation over us, for without our effective cooperation, it never would have been possible.

All we see transpiring worldwide should give us cause to reflect and consider with great care that which we have become and to further consider and decide what it is that we wish to become, both individually (most important), and as societies.  Do you really want to be slave to a raft of petty, third-rate, vicious buffoons?  It is one thing to be subjugated by an indomitable adversary worthy of some respect for his capabilities, but to willingly place your head into the noose of an all-thumbs, blithering incompetent to your own destruction... that's just cause for endless, searing shame and embarrassment.

We should all endeavor to do better.  If we fail, Theye will have us for good before much longer.

Until next time, please accept my best wishes.

SCOTUS Offers Little Basis For Optimism In Second Amendment Case

I'm not seeing why anyone would be particularly impressed with the intermediate results in the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen case. Cautious optimism is about all I can muster, and only with supreme effort. I heard the oral arguments and can only say that I was singularly unimpressed with the performances of most of the justices. Roberts, for example, either fails to understand rights, the Constitution, or both. The Constitution does NOT "grant" rights, yet he asserted that it was so. The Constitution RECOGNIZES and PROTECTS them. Roberts showed himself insufficient to the task of hearing these arguments by that virtue alone, even if he appears to otherwise lean in favor of the 2A. I am tempted to put money on his not understanding that which constitutes (defines) a right, were I in a betting mood. Furthermore, I would almost bet money I do not have that Roberts, and perhaps several other members of the bench are unaware of the different sorts of rights that exist, much less that they would be able to describe them in a show of understanding.

Furthermore, the justices' tone bordered on the wishy-washy in several instances as they posed questions and responses to Underwood, counsel for the state of New York. I would have let her know in no uncertain terms that she was absolutely mistaken on her points of logic, which were embarrassingly failed. They did point out the failures, but I do not believe they did so with sufficient force, as they indulged in the brands of equivocation for which SCOTUS is so notorious.. Perhaps they feel clarity and sufficiency is not important. Regardless, where questions of fundamental rights are concerned, clarity, correctness, and completeness on one's knowledge, deliberations, and responses to flawed argument are absolutely paramount.

Another problem readily apparent is that the arguments made by plaintiff's counsel is based on a reliance on "text and tradition", which is a non-principled basis for justification of the right.  It is perhaps necessary to argue so weakly because the system only recognizes such things, but if this is the case, so much more damning is it of the train wreck that is American jurisprudence.

Rights are non-negotiable and may not be circumscribed in the ways that the Court has so erroneously asserted for many decades. Rights are absolute, but with those rights come the obligations of each man not to trespass upon the equally valid claims of his fellows. The assumption that rights may be regulated and through regulation, effectively attenuated is cancer to all freedom, immediately reducing a man to some degree of servitude, thereby rendering him as no longer properly free.

The correct view on this is as follows. Rights are absolute, PERIOD. So, too, are the obligations to bring no unjust harm to others. Therefore, exercise your rights as you may wish, bearing in mind that you will be held accountable for any unjust results of your choices. Carry your gun where, when, and how you deem fitting for yourself, but if your comportment brings another to unjust harm, be prepared to pay the price. The notion of prior restraint pursuant to the assumption that a right is not absolute and may therefore me circumscribed and thereby effectively circumvented for ostensibly noble reasons is yet another cancer upon free societies. It is a perfect case of ends justifying means, which is a principle that courts routinely reject with much hissing and stamping of feet for right and proper reasons. And yet, they hypocritically accept it in the cases of rights, doubtlessly because it suits the agenda of governmental power to do so. No doubt deciding that this case is one of those instances of "but this is different...", we get treated to the egregiously abusive vagaries of equivocation and the evasion of the most basic truths as embodied in the principles of human freedom and the rights that evolve therefrom. Such behavior is, at best, gross incompetence, but because they presume to wield the authority and men with guns will kill you if you protest too effectively, they get to dictate and we get to kowtow.

I will be glad if they strike down the NY permitting system, but feel inclined to bet money I don't have that they will leave doors wide open for disingenuous circumvention through the language of exceptions, much as Scalia did in Heller, which effectively nullified the decision in great measure.

There appears much left to be desired in this challenge to NY state's phony baloney restrictions on the sovereign rights of free men of that land. The fact that the justices are not quite right about rights and their nature leaves me with threadbare reasons for optimism here. I fully expect them to ruin this opportunity to make a clean, clear, and perfectly non-equivocating statement on the relevant issues by muddying the waters with the language of half-measures that will allow the corrupt governments of NYS to effectively continue as they have, at least in great majority, moving forward.

Lemons To Lemonade

Democrats have been pushing for a so-called "voting rights" bill, HR4.  Scanning the document, it is a nightmare of indirection such that anyone seeking the least hope of divining so much as a scrap of reliable meaning from it would have to engage in significant labor, going step-by-step, inserting and removing text from the extant statutes as the legislation proposes to amend.

I have discerned a few nuggets, none of them looking good for liberty, but cannot claim to have done so sufficiently to form an intelligent assessment of the bill.  Suffice to say that it is an act of Congress, which in itself should set anyone with an IQ into a state of deep suspicion and high alert.

My purpose here is to offer a raving mad idea about which to think in terms of possible future chicanery on the part of sitting Democrats and their political machinery.  I hope that by putting this idea out, perhaps it will aid in some small way to thwart any such notion on their parts, having been forestalled though exposure.  We must remain alert because where politics are concerned, nearly anything is possible.

Clearly, the Democrats are eager to see HR4 become statute, and though those prospects seem thin at this time, they have nothing to lose by maintaining the press.  It makes sense that the Democrats want this to happen prior to the 2022 midterm elections in order to stave off the loss of their current controlling majority in the House, and the possibility of losing their majority in the Senate.  Given the abominably low approval of the current president, not only are these outcomes a real possibility, at times they appear as likelihood.

Given these lemons, how might the Democrats attempt to make lemonade?  Glad you asked.

If we assume that the current president remains in office through 2024, loss of both houses may not be as disastrous as it seems at first blush.  It is doubtful they would lose by anything more than by a thin margin, which would allow the veto to hamstring Republicans at every turn.  Furthermore, given the turncoat character of far too many Republicans, there would remain some possibility that HR4 could pass during the second half if the current presidential term in any event.  But how to make it happen if you're in the minority in both houses?  How, indeed.

Were Democrats able to pass HR4 prior to the 2024 elections, they could possibly position themselves in a way we may have never before seen in American politics, effectively ending two-party rule.  Here, we are working on the reasonable assumption that HR4 is not what it appears and that it is in fact a means for affecting the theft of elections, moving forward.  Given the apparent chicanery of the 2020 election, a topic we shall ignore here, nothing should be dismissed as implausible.

Imagine the Democrats actually engaging in ballot stuffing/harvesting in order to rig the midterm results in favor of Republicans.  Seems utterly absurd, does it not?  And yet, were they to do so, they could themselves play the victims of evil Republican election fraud.  With a compliant and indeed eager media, nobody needs to guess how this would play out on the broadcast networks.  The barrage of accusations would be loud, massive, and unceasing.  Democrats would howl for a forensic investigation of polling data, etc.  Clear evidence of felonious tampering with the ballots would appear and the spotlight would immediately fall on the Republicans.  After all, why would the Democrats rig an election against themselves? 

Having been condemned by Democrats, tried by media, and a gullible and lazy public turning against them, Republicans would do what they do best: retreat like sissies into defensive positions.  They would turn out looking like stooges, cowards, and most importantly, GUILTY of massive election fraud.  In the wake of this, Democrats, once again greatly aided and abetted by media, would get on the campaign as to why HR4 must be passed and signed into effect immediately.  Think of the children!  I would bet that there would be just enough shivering and/or paid-for Republicans to get the job done, after which the enactment of the bill would allow Democrats to take the presidential election in 2024, establishing their positions of authority in such matters in teh context of the newly amended voting laws for decades to come, or longer.  Showing a landslide victory in the face of "public outrage" at Republicans, Democrats would then further capitalize on this turn of fortunes by citing it as a clear mandate by the American people for them do as they pleased.  

So positioned, Democrats would be able to hold on to carefully managed margins of victory - thin enough  to avoid suspicion by the average dullard - and keep the Republicans effectively shut out of power for a very long time.  All the while, media would be pounding home the "nothing to see here, move along" message, while simultaneously blowing every Republican's in-grown toenail as a looming, apocalyptic threat to our belovèd democracy.  The Republican party would be reduced to the status of window dressing for the purposes of maintaining the illusions of two-party rule, "democracy", and the ever devolving definition of "freedom".

Hopefully, such a grand conspiracy is not in the works, but given that this is big league politics, one should refrain from dismissing this seemingly wild possibility out of hand.  If you are inclined to do so, bear in mind that history has shown without equivocation that fortune favors the bold, and that the more wildly and ambitiously unlikely the plan, the less likely is the average man to believe it could ever happen.

Remain strong, God bless the good land of America, and until next time please accept my best wishes.

Superorganization Is A Trap That Cannot Be Avoided

Some while ago I opined the troubles with the notion of Lowest Denominators.  I also wrote briefly on the concept of Superorganization.  Today, I combine the two and reveal how these phenomena combine and conspire to create a trap that is likely impossible to escape, given our nature as humans.

In the first example, I pointed out that in the case of China, American manufacturers were presented with the choice of moving their operations to China's slave-labor economy, or be consumed by their competition.  I noted how sporting footwear, for example, saw top-end products fall precipitously in price, in many cases from several hundreds of dollars per pair, to under $100.  The near-zero labor costs drove this change and anyone who wished to remain in business, much less healthily so, was forced to go Chinese.  The short-term results were fabulous, while those of the longer term have proven far less appealing, especially since those manufacturers now find themselves in the bind of economic manacles.

In the second example, I noted the advantages of superorganization, where sufficiently large numbers of people cooperate with sufficiently adept management to accomplish what in many cases are truly monumental goals as a single organism, the Superorganism as I like to call them.  Corporations are prime examples of Superorganizations.  Could a single man have launched another into earth orbit?  No.

Armies may be the ultimate example of superorganization.

By now you may be putting two and two together, in case the deeper point still evades you, allow me to elucidate.

Superorganization tends to have large costs associated with it.  Running a mom and pop sandwich shop does not carry the same resource requirements as, say, operating a large standing army, or a government.  This in itself is not a particularly grave problem, save for the fact that the only way in which people have figured out how to finance such endeavors has been the forcible robbery of huge populations in the form of taxation.

The naive lover of freedom might render the knee-jerk response, saying "eliminate government!"  Would that it were so easily done.  The trap here is precisely the lowest denominator of establishing and creating a standing army.  Once nation A does so, nations B, C, D, etc. become faced with the choice of whether to follow suit.  If they don't, they stand the risk of being attacked and subdued by A.  That is a risk few in the modern world are willing to assume.  Therefore, they feel forced to establish and maintain armies of their own, which costs money and which in turn requires the further extorting of their populations for the funds to do so.

A great example of this came during the later nineteenth century as Great Britain foolishly undertool to build their first modern battleship, an economy-herniating endeavor whose net results were naught but trouble for everyone.  Once they built their first such vessel, which arguably loaned them some advantage over the other navies of the world, the Germans, Americans, Austro-Hungarians, Russians, French, Italians, Japanese , and perhaps a few others all threw in, wasting endless resources that, in my opinion, might have been devoted to more profitable endeavors.

Superorganizations are neither good nor bad in themselves.  When put to good purposes, they can accomplish magnificent things.  When otherwise put, we get "cultural" revolutions, replete with tens of millions of corpses.  Good or bad, in the context of an environment of hard adversarial competition such as that found between some nations, they become a trap away from which few see the possibility of a path that does not carry with it categorically unacceptable risks.  They now find themselves unable to extricate themselves from the life-destroying burdens of maintaining such organizations.

Take the Centers for Disease Control, for example.  As of recent times, their credibility has slipped precipitously in the wake of their blatant nonsense with regard to the so-called "pandemic" of the SARS Cov-2 virus.  My gut impulse is to call for their immediate dissolution, and all who can be proven to have knowingly peddled the lies tried, convicted, imprisoned, and in some cases executed for crimes against humanity, a charge that remains on the books.  But positive reality dictates I keep that notion in my pants, so to speak.  Why?  Because America's enemies, which include China among others, have created superorganizations such as the Wuhan bioweapons facility where bright but misguided people obediently continue exploring the possibilities of biological stoogery with viruses, bacteria, and other pathogenic agents.  Being our enemies, they cannot be trusted not to one day actively engage in operations that would see some terrible plague foisted upon the world.  In such an event, individuals sitting in their basements, hiding from the bugs with naught but hope and their prayers, seem unlikely candidates for coming up with cures against such assaults.

The only currently viable hope against such an attack would be our own superorganization with the resources to combat such an attack.  Yes, we could establish private organisms, and perhaps we have, but "government" being what it is, will not be likely to relinquish the sort of power represented by establishments such as CDC, FDA, and so forth.

While in principle it would be a simple matter to walk away from such foolishness, the chances of that actually happening in the face of the colluding counterincentives of fear and the determination to maintain power, rapidly and intimately approach zero.  The risks appear too great, and this is understandable.

This sort of circumstance applies to many cases, especially those where economic or political stakes are high and exist in adverse environments.  We trap ourselves such that extrication becomes nearly impossible and almost always entails risks worse than those perceived to be keeping us in.  How can one free himself from the burdens of structures that suck away his life so long as the threats they are intended to protect him from remain?  

Yup, a trap and we're all stuck in it because of our mutual suspicions, fears, greed, and other manifold and raving stupidities.

Verily do human beings tend to be their own worst enemies.

Be well, and until next time please accept our best wishes.

As The Official Covid Narrative Collapses...

Over the past week or so, I have noted that Theye are now engaging in what clearly appears as a damage control campaign, perhaps to forestall and mitigate the potential consequences to come in the wake of what currently appears to be the in-progress collapse of the official covid narrative.But what if there is something far more sinister at work here? How could it be more so than what we've enjoyed since 2019? 

 Glad you asked.

At the beginning of all of this I offered the obviously paranoid thought in other venues that this could all be a prelude to something far worse - that the objective of this covid deal is to fatigue the population to such a point that no longer do they trust an "official" word uttered, nor will they then obey orders. This appears to be coming to pass as I write these words, which I will address forthwith.

The fatigue bit is now long-established. People are just worn out by the endless bad news, the idiotic mandates, the fear mongering, the seemingly endless phalanx of new "variants", the guilt-shame campaigns and demonizing of those who are not quite buying the baloney, and so forth.  Entire populations are now openly protesting in Europe, Canada, and Australia, clearly fed-up to their eyeballs with the gross excesses of abuse and the threats now clearly presented to the people at large, not to mention to the young.

Scanning various outlets, the sentiments of this state of being fed-up can be well nutshelled by a single statement I saw posted just this morning which read, "I will never trust public health officials again", which brings me directly to the point I wish to make.

What if this fatigue was the precise strategy behind this two-year terror campaign against the unwashed human masses of the earth?  Imagine a deeper strategic objective being that once properly conditioned to ignore anything offocials might say regarding future outbreaks, the real pathogen is then released. As cases pop up initially, the relevant outlets issue their dire warnings, which are ignored by a distrusting populace.  This delay provides just enough obstruction of proper responses to result in a cull that provides Themme with the greatly reduced populations they seek, and a basis for saying "hey, it's not our fault, we warned you."

Some might think that this is too much fuss. Why not just let the fur fly, have your cull, and move on? Because there would presumably be a world left for moving on, and those people who survived but were not part of Theire cadre would become an immediate and dangerous threat to Theire continued existences. Theye cannot wipe us all out because they need us for the menial tasks, not to mention that they want people over whom to lord, which is perhaps the majority reason that Theye do what they do.

Therefore, wiping us out in toto would not only be undesirable, it would be potentially very dangerous for Themme. Theye need not just subjects over whom to rule, but also an ever-present potential threat to their position in order to maintain the necessary focus of purpose and cohesion, such that their hegemony may span endless generations into the blue future.  After all, our history is checkered with examples of how nations rise and fall, as well as the reasons for the cycles. I do not believe that Theye have not taken all that into study and ultimate account, now that global dominion stands within their reach.

And so Theye need a plausible explanation to the survivors that so ironically tells why Theye are not to blame for any of it and how Theye in fact endeavored so valiantly to save a reticent humanity from destruction and how so few heeded their instructions, etc. and so on ad nauseum. This serves the purposes of keeping Theire heads on their shoulders in the immediate timeframe, and to cement their positions as authority in the minds of the rabble for the long term, without notable challenge. The new mantra, tacit or expressed, might be something along the lines of "we've had quite enough of this dissent nonsense" or "we can no longer afford to have people going against our command - we see how it has resulted".

I am in no measure comforted by the apparent collapsing of the phony baloney covid narrative. I do in fact, find cause to be alarmed at it, given the possibility as I've outlined above. And for those who would dismiss this as yet another "conspiracy theory", I bid you take heed of the warning that no matter how unlikely it may seem, where politics are concerned there should be nothing placed outside the realm of plausibility, save that Theye have become decent human beings interested in your better interests.

These dangerous jackanapes have taken a huge risk in this latest and perhaps largest global perpetration. I do not for a moment believe that any of this has been done without some enormous payout in mind, the currency there always being power. One thing I can nearly guaRONtee is that this was not conducted for the sake of some token fortune of money, or similar. The stakes here are staggering, IMO, and since Theye have clearly failed in the endeavor at hand, it seems likely to me that the apparent end-goal was not the actual objective.

Bear further in mind that most likely nobody of import will be held accountable for the carnage. Talking heads, Anthony Fauci, a few administrators here and there are readily sacrificed to sate public outrage while Theye remain safe behind their anonymity. That, of course, means that they retain their powers and resources, which may be brought into play as deemed fitting. Therefore, the threat shall not have been removed in any sense whatsoever, save in the misled perceptions of the mean man, leaving humanity open for the next volley.

I will repeat what bears it: Theye are playing for keeps, and I hold no doubt that they would sacrifice billions of lives to gain that which they covet.

And just to keep you clear as to your place in all this, I offer George Carlin's quip:

"It's a great big club, and you ain't in it."

Neglect this at your peril, for if it comes all to naught, you've lost little in at least having given it due consideration.  But if it proves out, at least you may have some small opportunity to steel yourself against what is to come.

Until next time, please accept my best wishes.

Freedom Begins With You

A good thing that has emerged during this time of festering tyranny is the awakening of growing numbers of people to the greater truths of freedom.  Hard times tend to make good men, but unlike in times past, we now have a global information network, the broader effects of which I suspect were something which Theye failed to take into account.  Of late Theye have been attempting to bring the public forum of information exchange under greater control through cancel culture and other measures.  The good news is that thus far Theye have been mostly failing, despite their ever more seemingly frantic efforts to silence dissent and defiance.

Opinions regarding the quality of humanity's future vary widely from the pollyanna to the apocalyptic.  Those on the more naively optimistic end speak often of their faith that liberty and good shall ultimately triumph.  I share the hope of it, but insofar as the faith bit...

I have no such faith, nor do I need it. 

All I require is my drive to defy Themme in all the ways I am able, which I do daily. I publish, opinionize, analyze, speak out against tyranny; I disseminate everything for which Theye hold dread apprehension at the possibility of those things taking hold in the minds of the vulgar masses, and for which they would see me and other clarions brought to silence.  I exercise my rights with conviction and frequency, doing so blatantly that all may see, regardless whether they understand or agree.

The ultimate outcome doesn't matter so much to me, as does the act of defying the evil that gallops roughshod and so freely across the planet.  I remain intolerant of the intolerable, the tautology being sufficient justification in itself for all I do pursuant the goal of thwarting Themme at every available turn.

I'm slowly getting old and will be short of this world soon enough. But so long as I remain, I will rise to face the tyrant and command him to beg off. 

The Tyrant cannot buy me, nor can he intimidate me.  He can only bring me to physical ruin via the violence he brings, which is perforce a temporary condition, thereby annulling its power over me. By these virtues am I more powerful than Themme, despite all their money, armies, economic might, and the deeply neurotic avarice that seems to drive every action they take. Theye pale weakly compared with myself and all like me whose hearts are true to what is right and good between men. 

Removing oneself from concern for the ultimate result of his endeavors leads him to a mental state which Theye fear, for such men cannot be overcome by any means. This is the warrior mind, and it is the direct path to freedom. 

I am, by virtue of my choices, invincible and free.  By the same means have all the great and defiant men acquitted themselves most nobly.  By the same means do people defeat themselves and relegate themselves to servitude as slave to others.  These choices are always ours to make, this way or that.

Anyone is capable of deciding for themselves to be free.  That means you.  All it takes is the determination to be indomitable, and an understanding of what it means to become so.  One key is to become unconcerned with victory or defeat, and to press on regardless of the perceived prospects.

Think on these words as to what you might aspire - invincible, indomitable, unconquerable, unbeatable, unassailable, invulnerable, impregnable, staunch, ruthless, indefatigable, intransigent,  uncompromising, inflexible, unbending, resolute, obdurate, unwavering, unyielding, unshakeable, insurmountable, unpersuadable, unaccommodating, uncooperative, stubborn, obstinate, single-minded, iron-willed, diehard, unrelenting, immutable, immovable, firm, steadfast, inveterate, adamant, determined, tenacious.

Unlike the qualities that are celebrated and ever increasingly demanded by lesser men, and which are indeed hallmarks of the Weakman, the Freeman exalts in the power of resting beyond the reach of the cancerous values that his inferiors hold so dear, and which they would force upon him, were they able.

Know that there resides within yourself great power such that the Tyrant cannot overcome you, if you choose to assert it with unbending intent.  It is a simple thing to choose, but that does not mean it is easy.  Courage is a cornerstone, and it is not a characteristic that one either has, or doesn't.  It cannot be bought or otherwise obtained, but is given rise as the result of individual choice.  The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand precisely because it is a choice that one makes, rather than being a goal to be chased.  One need only choose it, and it shall be.  Mind is the only obstacle standing between you and true freedom.  

Courage and understanding are the ways of the Freeman.  Choose one, gain the other, and be true to both.  

Until next time, please accept my best wishes.

The Seemingly Absurd Common Response To The Ridiculous Pandemic Narrative

Today I am noting large numbers of people who wonder why so many others have bought into the transparently absurd narrative of this so-called "pandemic" of the SARS Cov-2 virus. I believe there is a very good and clear cause underpinning it.

The bottom line insofar as the reasons for participation in such absurdities is comfort. All people chase comfort, there being no exceptions. Comfort may be manifested in the particulars differently between individuals, at times widely so. But at the bottom of it all lies a state of being to which people strongly wish to attach themselves, which we may call "comfort". The alcoholic finds comfort in his bottles, the heroin addict in being dissociated from gruesome reality. There's the CEO who, having to navigate the stresses of responsibility for so many lives, escapes on Saturday nights when he gives himself over to the girl with the whip and rubber clothing.

There is not a single human being on this planet who does not chase comfort in some form. It is part and parcel of what we are as living beings. When the stresses of life overwhelm, people will accept almost any proposition that promises to relieve their individual burdens, which is the comfort they seek. And so here we are, two years into raving, transparent lunacy with people having been stupefyingly compliant to the most obviously idiotic governmental edicts, ostensibly aimed at protecting the "public health".

Perhaps the decades of ever mounting stresses of daily living turned out as the glad happenstance for the political class in that those conditions gradually reduced the general population to such a state of mental degradation that they became susceptible to tipping point conditions. The added element of an intentionally released pathogen was all that would be needed to induce such dread that the people would become readily pliable in terms of their will to obey any order issued, no matter how transparently senseless. Then again, in hindsight it seems even possible that these life-wracking stresses may not have been coincidence at all - who can say for certain? Regardless of intentions, once the tipping point is reached, a carrot can be presented - promising relief from those negative conditions in the form of a single, simple and common goal, which would constitute the comfort element to which people would naturally and eagerly flock. Even if all circumstances were "innocent", the astute political opportunist will quickly see the possibilities therein and adapt himself to take the fullest advantage of a chance to further cultivate his position and power. He detects the weakness of the people and employs their mounting desire for comfort against them.

Having been driven in many cases to near frenzy, the comforting elements are introduced in the most simplistic terms. Wear this mask; keep that distance; take this drug; have that booster. Do as you are told and all will be well. The great leaders, the experts, tell you what to do, absolving you of all responsibility to think for yourself and, perhaps most importantly, relieving you of the stresses of uncertainty... Only, it is all lies. But what does that matter when you have been offered the option of believing that which leads you to relative ease? Most people are going to grab it and hold on like grim death. And so we see it coming to pass daily before our eyes.

We see the tangent symptoms of this everywhere now, what with the deepening divisions that are developing between those who, for example, take the so-called "vaccines" and those who decline them. The propagandizing of "government", aided and abetted by the large broadcast news outlets is leading to ever intensifying hostilities of one group against another, leading huge subpopulations not only to come to agreement with "state" proposals to force the administration of unwanted drugs upon the rest, but to an ever growing demand by some that it be made so.

If this doesn't reek and smack of a Hegelian dialectic, what does?

The clever charlatan always plays on people's hunt for comfort. Hit the right nerve and success is all but guaranteed. That is how predictable the human animal is in such respects. Find their heart's desire, hold it out to them, and they will murder their own children for the sake of attaining it while offering all righteous rationalizations for having done so.

Beware of your own desires, the weaknesses to which they can give rise, and always be alert to the ways in which others might try to turn them against you.

Be well, and until next time please accept my best wishes.

People Of Color

The muck-rakers of the so-called "left "† are endlessly clever in contriving and using weaponized linguistic terms.   I have found it quite interesting to observe how they make up expressions, the intentions and objectives of which are to stir the emotions in the most negative ways, due in large part to the deeply negative connotations such terms carry (often tacitly), place them "out there" through various channels, and how such terms seem to so readily take root in the minds a great many people without having to bear so much as the least burden of scrutiny.

Terms such as "racism", "homophobia", "misogynist", "patriarchy", etc., are all good examples of how new terms were yanked from thin air, and old ones redefined through misapplication and consequent misuse.  The fact that these terms have so broadly succeeded in their goals as altering factors in the ways that people perceive and respond to specific conditions in the social aether is something at which one ought truly marvel, and be appalled.  The fact that human beings are so easily lead by their noses, in the relevant case here to their own effective destruction, should leave the hairs on us all reaching for the stars. 

Idioms of more recent vintages ("safe space", "gender fluid", etc.) connote notions deserving of naught but our backs, and yet have managed to stick.  This may testify to the innate corruptibility of the human animal, but it may also speak to the raw power of broadcast media, and perhaps a combination of the two.

But today's objective is to focus on a single term and the notion it conveys: "people of color".  

For many decades the terms issuing from the left have all carried the taint of bitterness, hatred, confrontation, envy, and a whole list of other negative connotations, one of the most useful among them being "victimhood".  "People of color" are, more than anything else, offered up in the perceiving mind as victims.  This is all very tacit, of course, but nonetheless set forth with great pressure.  People of color are victims first and foremost.  Somewhat paradoxically, they are also offered up as being so wonderful; as better than white people.  They are, in fact, the superior people who at the same time are victims of the white, which is tacitly implied with equal force to be not of color.  This is ironic when one realizes from a strictly scientific perspective that "white" is the presence of all color.  "White" people are the most colored of all humans, the "black" being absent of all color.  This alone should lend one a very strong hint at the patently ridiculous nature of the expression.  

But if we're going to play that tainted game, the results of which are naught but to cause ever deeper harm to human relations, then white people hold more claim to "people of color" than any other group.  

Naturally, that tidbit of truth is of no interest to the Weakman who, for whatever reason, has vested himself in the leftist world view.  For him, his truth is the only truth in spite of the utter absence of its demonstration.  Similarly, the views of all others are to him invalid and false, regardless of how perfectly proven.

Whether it was intended, and the likelihood is that it was, people of color have vested themselves in the negative, while at the same time voicing the more positive virtues of "love", "equality", "justice", and so forth.  When observing the average "man of color" in action, it becomes clear that their walk does not accord with their talk.  They make clear that their individual understandings of the various idealized terms that they so casually spew into the aether are either catastrophically lacking, or they intentionally misuse them pursuant to some unpublished agenda.

So-called "people of color" are not the only guilty/duped parties in all this.  There exists a large and vital contingent of lefties of the "white" vintage who actively aid, abet, and endeavor to foster the dangerous follies that these broken expressions are intended to work toward.  They do so in large part by their endless virtue-signaling, the subtext to it all being the wholly ego-absorbed message of "everybody look at me... I'm so special and evolved.  I'm so selfless... so much better than everyone else", the great irony there being that all this carrying on about themselves is the very antithesis of selflessness.  A more self-absorbed personality one would be hard pressed to identify.

The white regressive goes to extraordinary pains to gain the acceptance of his non-white compatriots, to the point of embarrassment.  And yet, when the thinking man stops to carefully consider the spew that issues from such people, we find that their words are rotten with implied racial bias and hatred, leaving one to wonder whether the white regressive is even aware of the truer nature of the things he utters.

For example, they go on endlessly about how the poor "man of color" suffers under the tyranny of systemic white racism (subtext there is that only white people can be racist).  Their argument extends from there to imply ever so tacitly that without the aid of the white man, those of color will continue to suffer economic and social failure.  The assumption that "people of color" are nearly universally failed seems a bit of a stretch.  That "people of color" are incapable of rising above squalor without the kind and able ministrations of whitey is about as disparaging an assumption as one can make.  It reflects the true inner state of the regressive mindset of those who identify as "left".  They rant endlessly that people of color are equal, yet their demands suggest nothing other than that they see such people are inferior, the only path to equal outcomes being accessible only through the white man's hand.  If we go with the assumption of equal potential, then the white regressive suite of views and the attendant demands become absurd on their faces, to the point of blatant idiocy.  Nobody who accepts that we as individual human beings hold broadly similar capacities for attaining prosperity can take seriously the thinly veiled racial bias of the regressive leftist, whose deeds contravene their claimed ideals and assumptions.  Their behavior represents the pinnacle of disingenuous hypocrisy, and a strong will to stupidity and outright evil.

"People of color" serves only to divide us.  There are evil whites over here, and over there are their victims, the poor, hapless, feckless, abused, and helpless people of color.  Oh, the humanity!  Once again we see just how nakedly ridiculous this all proves when one steps away from the emotional manipulation and examines the deeper implications.  That is the fly in the leftist ointment where this linguistic tactic is concerned: the moment a man decides to place all these slogans and other expressions under even the least scrutiny, the duplicitous nature becomes clear.  The man will right away become more curious and endeavor to dig more deeply.  Once that path is undertaken, there is no going back, and that is why the peddlers of leftist imbecility endeavor with such vigor to keep their people ginned up with raw emotions, that they have no time to relax, which might lead them to reflect.  Thinking is the one thing the Tyrant cannot tolerate in his useful idiots.  They must be constantly diverted from deeper thought by keeping their emotions wound up like watch springs about to come apart.

There is no aspect of the expression "people of color" that carries the least virtue.  It is a contrivance of pure evil, intended to destroy human relations such that they are reduced to a most rudely confrontational nature.  After all, were we to come together in natural friendship, the so-called "left" would have absolutely nothing left to peddle.  Their entire house is built upon the foundation of hate-ridden bitterness, envy, and confrontation.  They rarely, if ever, speak in positive terms, save their fog-bound references to the usual terms such as love, etc., but which never see any practical traction.  In practice, it is always the negative emotions based in hatred and fear that come to the measurable fore.  Lefties never swarm the streets to hug people, shake their hands, or share kind sentiments.  On the mean, those of the left, always move to hurt and destroy in fits of anger- and terror-ridden venting.  They are precisely those things against which they expend so much time and energy expelling their venom in projection. 

Its glaring absurdity notwithstanding, "people of color" has proven very effective in helping realize the intermediate goals of the left.  Today we stand more divided than perhaps at any other time in recent human history, demonstrating just how irrelevant logic, reason, truth, and honor really are to the average man.  Johnny Q. Public wants what he wants and does not much care how he comes to attain it, so long as he is not required to work, or think, and preferably with an appearance of propriety.  Given that, it is little wonder that he is so readily duped with the emotionally charged manipulations that are epitomized by expressions like "people of color", if they help him get what he wants...

The material solutions to this trouble are clear and quite simple.  However, the greatest problem of all is that of mind and the will to do what is needed to overcome the chicanery of those who intend to rule the world as a single despotic entity.  Unless enough of us choose the correct attitude, we are as good as lost.

Until next time, please accept my best wishes. 

† A common euphemism for "socialist", "communist", "progressive", "regressive", all of which are interchangeable terms for the same thing: forced authoritarian collectivist despotism.