A Claim

Hilary Clinton is claiming that the 2016 presidential election was stolen from her.  in fact Democrats routinely steal elections.  If Comrade Hilary won (or more likely "won") she would have been executed for Treason and Tyranny.

This story was set in The Official Traveller Universe.

Ian saw that the old bakery building at 22nd Avenue and Washington Street was boarded up again, another attempt to redevelop the property without demolishing the original single story brick structure had failed.

Plastered all over the structure were posters showing a black and white photograph of a sixty-ish woman, with short fake blonde hair, a standard nine-millimeter service pistol was aimed at her head. The hammer of the pistol in the photograph was blurred as though it were falling on the firing pin.

Over the photograph on the poster in all capital letters was the one word, REMEMBER.

"I'm sorry sir," said the Chief as he pointed to the posters, "but I'm not fully familiar with that bit of Terran history."

"Well," Ian replied, "That's Saint Hillary, a martyr for the holy cause of Democracy. She was just a stupid old bitch who believed that being democratically elected somehow constituted an excuse for abusive and destructive behavior."

Book Review

Those who're ignorant of history are a highly sought after voting bloc.

Here's a repost of a very important book review originally published in THE RESISTER.  If you haven't read it, you should.

BOOK REVIEW
-----------

The Ominous Parallels--The End of Freedom in America. Leonard Peikoff. New York: NAL Penguin, Inc., 1982. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 83-60247. ix + 316 pages plus references and index.. Soft cover $10.00.


Reviewed by Red Barchetta

This book asks: "What caused Nazi Germany?" Unlike lesser attempts to explain that blood bath, The Ominous Parallels answers: "The same philosophies that are prevalent in the United States of America." Dr. Peikoff argues convincingly that in both countries the intellectual, educational and political leadership share, explicitly or implicitly, the same core ideologies. These ideologies submit that reality is subjective--a malleable illusion; emotions are the proper guide to human action--especially the emotions of race and the tribe, which cannot be understood by outsiders; self-sacrifice for the sake of others should usurp a man's own desires--and the state must take any necessary action to ensure that sacrifice. These ideologies demand that "individual selfishness" does not obstruct the path of "the public interest."

From Part One, Chapter One: " 'To be a socialist,' says Goebbels, 'is to submit the I to the thou; socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole.' By this definition, the Nazis practiced what they preached. They practiced it at home and then abroad. No one can claim that they did not sacrifice enough individuals."

The underlying theme in The Ominous Parallels is how philosophy shapes cultures, and reading this book, it is difficult to escape a feeling of hopeless dread; of being caught in racing floodwaters and swept madly toward a destruction you are helpless to prevent. Given the theme of this nation's descent into fascism, and Dr. Peikoff's uncompromising method of proving it, that is the proper effect.

The conclusion of The Ominous Parallels is not that we are helplessly destined to go to the same lengths down the same road as Germany. The conclusion is that it is time for us to choose whether or not we will; that if we fail to consciously decide, the decision will be made for us. Contrary to the bleating of irrationalists then or now, it is only a coherent philosophy of reason and individual rights which will give us the means to choose not to become our own slaughterhouse.

Dr. Peikoff shows that such a philosophy is not prevalent in the United States because, although this nation was unique in being founded on philosophic ideals (rather than arbitrary land-grabs and tribal warfare), it was ultimately lacking a coherent detailed formulation of those ideals, as well as the Aristotelian philosophers to create one. Independence from Europe was only won physically--not ideologically. "The land of poets and philosophers was brought down by its poets and philosophers," says Peikoff. The resulting bowel movement of docile Nazi sheep who obeyed their Fuhrer because they obeyed their philosophers could indeed be us, for their philosophers--their pragmatists and Kants, their Hegels and Marxes--are ours by adoption.

We do have one trump card, "...the philosophical breach between the American people and the intellectuals." In Germany, the intellectuals and the people were united in ideology, feeling at home in their country and with each other. This, says Peikoff, is not yet the case in America. Peikoff's book will help to keep it that way.

After reading The Ominous Parallels by Leonard Peikoff I got the impression that the three things that separate the old school German National Socialists from the present day members of the Left here in America are a bath, a clean uniform, and a can of Zyklon-B.

A  shorter version of the book, titled The Cause Of Hitler's Germany is now in print.

I’ll quote from page 44 of The Cause Of Hitler’s Germany by Leonard Peikoff:

“There was Friedrich Nitetzche, the prophet of the superman and the will to power, who was acclaimed by Hitler as one of his predecessors. The extent of Nitetzche’s actual influence in regard to the rise of Nazism is debatable...Nevertheless, he is a fervid romanticist, who revels in the post-Kantian anti-reason orgy, and there is much in his disjointed, aphoristic writings that the Nazis were able to quote with relish.  A view of the universe as a realm of clashing wills, ceaseless strife, and violent conflict; a glorification of cruelty and conquest, of ‘the magnificent blond brute, avidly rampant for spoil and victory’; the view that a few superbeings, ‘beyond good and evil,’ have the right to enslave the inferior masses for their own higher purposes–this is part of the Neitzchean legacy, as interpreted (with some justification) by the Nazis”

Replace the blonde with black and this covers the Black Lives Matter point of view.

Peikoff covers how the German intellectuals laid the cultural foundation for the rise of National Socialism.  And as we're now seeing the same foundation has been laid for Black Racial Collectivism.

Now if the black ubermensch types want to act as old school National Socialists then we must treat them as such.  We must crush them without mercy and execute their leaders.

 

Diferences And Democrats

In Russia high school students are required to read The Gulag Archipelago by Alexander Solzhenitsyn with assembling and disassembling a standard infantry weapon.  American high school students can't even do that.  American high school students are ignorant of Totalitarianism and tought to fear weapons.  Many American High School students have become advocates of Totalitarianism.  This is clearly wrong.   

Liberals (or Progressives as they prefer to call themselves) come up with excellent reasons for decent people to just curl up and die.  Liberals (or Progressives as they prefer to call themselves) have set the world standard for stupidity since November of 1917.  Liberals (or Progressives as they prefer to call themselves) fully believe in the Neolithic notion of beating up people and taking their stuff.

Democrats are a bunch of traitors, thieves, and murderers who don't care how high the pile of human bodies is as long as they're firmly seated on top, thus are objectively unfit to hold any form of public office.  If this wasn't bad enough, as a former Army combat rifleman who refuses to be an mindlessly obedient drone in the socialist collective I'd be looked upon by the Democrats as some form of vermin.  Given the explicitly hateful and Stalinist rhetoric coming from the Democrats, it wouldn't be unreasonable to conclude that I could end up face down in an unmarked ditch outside of town.

On Censorship

Censorship is the process of restricting information and thus the restriction of rational thought.  Because rational thought is necessary for human life the restriction of information has a toxic effect on a person.  The toxic effect could even be lethal.  The act of censorship reduces a person to the status of a mere animal.  Something to controlled, used, abused, and ultimately to be killed.  The act of censorship is beyond moral toleration, it's time to remove the censors. 

I'm reposting this:

The Tripwire
by
D. van Oort & J.F.A. Davidson
From The Resister

"How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive?"-- Alexander Solzhenitzyn, Gulag Archipelago

What would be the tripwire resulting in open rebellion? Examining the Bill of Rights, and considering EXISTING laws only, and not failed attempts, you will find that every clause has been violated to one degree or another.

Documenting those violations would fill volumes, and it is important to remember that only government can violate the exercise of unalienable individual rights and claim immunity from retribution. We omit martial law or public suspension of the Constitution as a tripwire. The overnight installation of dictatorship obviously would qualify as "the tripwire," but is not likely to occur. What has occurred, what is occurring, is the implementation of every aspect of such dictatorship without an overt declaration. The Constitution is being killed by attrition. The Communist Manifesto is being installed by accretion. Any suggestion that martial law is the tripwire leads us to the question: what aspect of martial law justifies the first shot?

For much the same reason, we will leave out mass executions of the Waco variety. For one thing, they are composite abuses of numerous individual rights. Yet, among those abuses, the real tripwire may exist. For another, those events are shrouded in a fog of obfuscation and outright lies. Any rebellion must be based on extremely hard and known facts. Similarly, no rebellion will succeed if its fundamental reasons for occurring are not explicitly identified. Those reasons cannot be explicitly identified if, in place of their identification, we simply point to a composite such as Waco and say, "See, that's why; figure it out." Any suggestion that more Wacos, in and of themselves, would be the tripwire, simply leads us back again to the question: what aspect of them justifies rebellion?

For the same reasons, we leave out a detailed account of Ayn Rand's identification of the four essential characteristics of tyranny. She identified them quite correctly, but together they are just another composite from which we must choose precipitating causes. These characteristics are: one-party rule, executions without trial for political offenses, expropriation or nationalisation of private property, and "above all," censorship.

With regard to the first characteristic of tyranny, what is the real difference between the Fabian socialist Republican Party and the overtly [Bolshevik] socialist Democratic Party? Nothing but time. Regarding the second we have the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team and the ATF's enforcement branch. In action they simply avoid the embarrassment of a trial. Regarding the third, we have asset forfeiture "laws," the IRS, the EPA, the FCC, the FDA, the Federal Reserve, the Justice Department's Antitrust Division, and a myriad of other executive branch agencies, departments, and commissions whose sole function is to regulate business and the economy. Regulating business for the common good (fascism) is no different in principle than outright nationalisation (communism).

However, the fourth characteristic of tyranny, censorship, is the obvious primary tripwire. When ideology and the reporting of facts and how-to instructions are forbidden, there is nothing remaining but to fight. Freedom of speech and persuasion -- the freedom to attempt to rationally convince willing listeners -- is so fundamental an individual right that without it no other rights, not even the existence of rights, can be enforced, claimed, debated, or even queried.

Does this censorship include the regulation of the "public" airwaves by the FCC, as in the censorship which prohibits tobacco companies from advertising -- in their own defense -- on the same medium which is commanded by government decree to carry "public service" propaganda against them? Does it include federal compulsion of broadcasters to air politically-correct twaddle for "The Children"? Does it include the Orwellian "Communications Decency Act"? Does it include any irrationalist "sexual harassment" or tribalist "hate speech" laws which prohibit certain spoken words among co-workers? The answer: unequivocally yes.

Although the above do not pertain to ideological or political speech, yet they are censorship and are designed to intimidate people into the acceptance of de facto censorship. We say that any abrogation of free speech, and any form of censorship, which cannot be rectified by the soap box, the ballot box, or the jury box, must be rectified by the cartridge box -- or lost forever.

Americans have been stumbling over tripwires justifying overt resistance for well over 130 years. On one hand, we submit that gun confiscation is a secondary tripwire only. It is second to censorship because if speech is illegal we cannot even discuss the repeal of gun control, or any other population controls. If only guns are illegal, we may still convince people to repeal those laws. On the other hand, gun confiscation may be a sufficient tripwire because the primary one, censorship, can be fully implemented only after the citizenry has been disarmed.

Resistance, in the context of this article, means those legitimate acts by individuals which compel government to restrict its activities and authority to those powers delegated to the Congress by the people in the Constitution.

The distinction to be drawn here is that the objective of patriotic resistance is to restore original Constitutional government, not change the form of government. To this end we believe: The enforcement of any laws -- local, state, or federal -- that through the action or inaction of the courts makes nugatory the individual means of resisting tyranny, justifies resistance.

The operative terms of the above statement are the parameters that must be defined and understood if resistance to tyranny and despotism is to be honourable, and for the cause of individual liberty, rather than anarchy resulting from a new gang of tyrants. Rebellion can never be justified so long as objective means of redress are available, which are themselves not subverted or rendered impotent by further or parallel subjective legislation.

The goal of patriots throughout the country must be the restoration of objective constitutional law and order. The failure to enforce a subjective law (i.e. the Communications Decency Act) does not justify that law existing, but it also does not justify resistance. This is because non-enforcement leaves avenues of redress, including the forbidden activity itself, still available. Should a lower court uphold or ignore a case that challenges subjective law, peaceable means of redress are still open by higher or lateral courts in another jurisdiction.

However, should the U.S. Supreme Court uphold subjective laws, or refuse to hear the cases challenging them, then the legislative, executive, and judicial branches have all failed to guarantee individual liberty, from the widest principles to the smallest details. A single refusal by the highest court in the land to overturn a whim-based subjective law, or to refuse to hear the case, is sufficient to justify resistance to that law because there is simply nowhere left to turn for further attempts at redress. At such time nobody is morally bound by that law. Tyranny gets one chance per branch.
America is either a constitutional republic or it is not. If we can restore our republic it will ultimately occur through reason, and reason will then lead our representatives to make unconstitutional those laws which, by any objective standard of justice, should have never been considered in the first place. However, we cannot assert our claim to restore our liberty if we but accede to a single socialist construct. Freedom and serfdom cannot coexist. We cannot have it both ways.

Life, and the means to preserve it, cannot coexist with disarmament. Liberty, and its rational exercise, cannot coexist with subjective constraints. Property, and its acquisition, use, and disposal cannot coexist with expropriation. The federal government's first task is to obey the Constitution. It has refused. Our first task as free men is to force the government to obey it again. The Constitution of the United States of America is a constraint on the federal government, not on the individual.
Likewise, the constitutions of the various states are constraints on the state governments, not on the individual. The Constitution contains many provisions allowing the violation of our natural rights as free men by immoral and unethical men in government. The true heroes of the ratification debates were the Anti-federalists, who secured Federalist guarantees that the Bill of Rights would amend the Constitution.

To their undying credit, the Federalists lived up to their promise. Nevertheless, only after constitutional limitations on government have been restored in their original form can we consider amending the Constitution to redress its very few remaining defects (for example, the absence of a separation of state and the economy clause).

Laws that make nugatory the means of resisting tyranny and despotism determine the tripwire. The creeping legislative erosion of the 2nd Amendment is not the only tripwire that justifies resistance. We submit that any gun control is a secondary tripwire. Not only because it can be effortlessly evaded, but also because it strengthens our cause. It is second only to censorship. If speech is illegal we can discuss neither repeal of gun control, or the repeal of any other unconstitutional "law."

Censorship is not a tripwire, it is THE tripwire. Thus, by default, censorship morally justifies rebellion.

Under censorship, no other rights, including the right to be free from censorship, can be advocated, discussed, or queried. It is incorrect to say that after censorship comes utter subjugation. Censorship is utter subjugation. There is no greater usurpation of liberty while remaining alive. After censorship come the death camps, and they are not a prerequisite of censorship, they are merely a symptom of it. Censorship qua censorship is sufficient in itself to justify open rebellion against any government that legislates, enforces, or upholds it.

However, that is not the half of it. Censorship is alone in being the only violation of individual rights that does not require actual enforcement or challenges in court, before rebellion is justified. When the government forbids you to speak or write, or use your own or a supporter's property to address willing listeners or readers, that government has openly and forcibly declared that the art of peaceful persuasion is dead and will not be tolerated. Upon that very instant, all peaceful avenues of redress have been closed and the only possible method of regaining that liberty is force. Whenever we give up that force, we are not only ruined, we deserve to be ruined.

Censorship is already being "legally" imposed through accretion by compromisers, appeasers, and pragmatists within government at all levels. Note the demands by "progressive" organisations and self-appointed "civil rights" groups to ban so-called "hate" speech (they mean thought and debate), or "extreme" language (they mean principled dissent), or "paramilitary" books (they mean the knowledge of how to resist). When our government imposes censorship, it will be because our ability to use force to resist censorship no longer exists. Buying copies of The Resister is not yet prohibited; buying machine guns already is. Unwarranted search for unlicensed books has not yet occurred; unwarranted search for unlicensed weapons has already begun. As your unalienable right of peaceable discussion and dissent is being daily abridged, your right to peaceably assemble and associate in advocacy of your own self-defence, according to your own free will, has already been outlawed (courtesy of ADL's "model" anti-militia legislation).

Unconstitutional federal agencies now arm themselves with weapons that you may not own, and train in tactics that you are prohibited from mastering. Before a government is sure you won't resist, it will make sure you can't resist.

The most irrational, contradictory, short-range, whimsical notion possible to men who claim the unalienable right to resist tyrannical government is the notion that they must first let their ability to resist be stripped from them before they have the right to use it. This is the argument of so-called conservatives who pish-tosh the notion of legislative "slippery-slopes," and sycophantic adherents of a supreme Court that has no constitutionally delegated authority to interpret the Constitution in the first place. We reject the notion of mindless compliance with subjective "laws." Subjective laws must be resisted on metaphysical and epistemological principles, moral and ethical grounds, and on constitutional and historical precedence.

No rational man desires ends without means. No rational man can be faced with his own imminent subjugation and truly believe that, once things are as bad as they can get, "sometime" "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract that trend. Any man who counsels another to appeal to those mystical equivalents of "divine intervention" for "deliverance" from tyranny is our enemy by all principles conceivable within the scope of rational human intelligence.

The time to organise resistance is not after censorship, but before it. The time to prepare resistance is when our ability to resist is being threatened. The time to begin resistance is when that threat has been upheld or ignored by the courts. The unalienable rights that safeguard our ability to resist are limited to those which, if not violated, allow us to plan and use all materials necessary for resistance. We submit that only the following meet that criteria: freedom of speech and of the press, and the right to peaceably assemble--so that we may advocate ideas, report and discuss news, and instruct others how to carry out resistance activities (1st Amendment); the right to keep and bear arms -- so that we may have appropriate force in our hands should we need it, and be trained to use such force as necessary (2nd Amendment); the right to be let alone -- so that we may be free of government intrusion in our lives, liberty, and property (3rd Amendment)); the right to be secure in our persons, dwellings, papers, and property from unwarranted, unaffirmed searches and seizures -- so that our records, ideological materials, and weapons will remain in our hands (4th Amendment).

For the purpose of this discussion, we believe that no other rights are relevant because if every individual right other than those four were violated -- although it would be an unspeakably evil act on the part of the government, justifying immediate and unforgiving resistance -- their abridgement would not effect our ability to resist. If any of the first four amendments are infringed by legislation, enforced by executive power, and their abrogation is upheld or ignored by the courts, unremitting, forcible resistance, and aid and comfort to its citizen-soldiers, is a moral imperative for every single person who believes that life, liberty, and property are unalienable and self-existing, and not grants of government privilege.

"The United States should get rid of its militias." -- Josef Stalin, 1933

"The foundation of a free government begins to be undermined when freedom of speech on political subjects is restrained; it is destroyed when freedom of speech is wholly denied." -- William Rawle, LL.D. Philadelphia, 1825

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -- Thomas Jefferson (1764) -- Quoting 18th Century criminologist Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment 

 

UPDATE 1100 CDT: there's a reason for rules, such as don't park in the no parking lane.

 

Proposal

We in the United States are stuck with two political parties.  The leadership of one party is insane and the leadership of the other party simply doesn't care.  Rank and file members now call establishment members a bunch of Vichy Republicans.

Perhaps its time to start a new political party.  Is a new political party possible?

The answer is: I don’t know.  The opponents of chattel slavery proceeded even with public opposition.  We, as opponents of political power, have to.  We need to treat exercises of political power, such as censorship, as crimes against Humanity.  We need to treat bans on firearms and free speech as the anti-Human acts that they actually are.  Our political elites have apparently forgotten the lesson taught by our original civil war, that banning freedom doesn’t work.  Our political elites tried to ban the voluntary consumption of alcohol, it didn’t work.  Our political elites tried to ban the voluntary consumption of hard drugs, it doesn’t work.  Our political elites will try to ban the voluntary ownership of firearms and freedom of speech, it will never work.  Our politicians are supposed to do a specific job and they aren't doing it.  We have to start a new political party to go around them.  We don't have a choice.

Let's call our new party the Freedom Party.

Will the Freedom Party replace the Democratic Party?

I don't think so.  What's more likely is that the Freedom Party will replace the Republican Party just like the Republicans replaced the Whigs.

(I linked to another persons post on this subject.)

 

 

A Prediction

 Opponents of Collectivism, including National Socialism, will be denounced as "Nazis."

Comments

What do I have to say about the current Hamas campaign of firing rockets into the state of Israel?

The answer is not nice.

We have to understand that the doctrine of Islam is a load of absolute nonsense.  If someone behaving like the self-proclaimed prophet Mohammad were to appear in the United States today that person would be declared insane, given a life sentence, or in states having the death penalty, given the needle.  But then what can one say about a false religion founded by an individual who combines and magnifies the worst attributes of Jeffery Epstein, Lafayette Ron Hubbard, Charles Manson, and turns them up beyond eleven?

Antisemitism in politics is the practical equivalent of a dead canary in a coal mine, I can't say this often enough.  Antisemitism is a subset of Racial Collectivism.  We have to condemn all forms of Racial Collectivism.  We have to identify Black Lives Matter as the Racial Collectivist group that it actually is.  We have to see that Antisemitism is a symptom of a deeper philosophical problem.  Rejection of Racial Collectivism shouldn't be a radical idea.

Maxine Waters clearly doesn’t believe in The Rule Of Law.  Under The Rule Of Law the act of acquittal is possible.  We hanged many of those who didn’t believe in The Rule Of Law at Nuremberg.  Perhaps we should set up the gallows again. 

Actions And Consequences

 Americans didn’t dump the British Monarchy so that Scientology could harass people.

Quote Of The Day

 From the comments on Robert Bidinotto's blog:

Around 1967 at the University of Chicago, I was talking to one of the radical guys in my dormitory. He argued that only a radical change in government would bring about a better society. I disagreed.

He said that his movement would become stronger, and eventually I would agree with him. I asked, what if I didn't agree with him, even later? He flashed anger and told me that if I didn't agree on my own, he would make me agree. I saw that as the end of the discussion.

-- Andrew Garland

Congratulations Biden voters!  You narcissistic assholes have sold an entire nation into bondage so you can feel good about yourselves.  On what grounds do you dare call yourselves Human?

Thoughts Of The Day

Antisemitism in politics is the practical equivalent of a dead canary in a coal mine, I can't say this often enough.  Antisemitism is a subset of Racial Collectivism.  We have to condemn all forms of Racial Collectivism.  We have to identify Black Lives Matter as the Racial Collectivist group that it actually is.  We have to see that Antisemitism is a symptom of a deeper philosophical problem.  Rejection of Racial Collectivism shouldn't be a radical idea.

The greatness of the West isn't an “ethnocentric” prejudice; it's an objective fact.  This assessment is based on the only proper standard for judging a government or a society: the degree to which its core values are pro- or anti-life.  Pro-life cultures acknowledge and respect man’s nature as a rational being who must discover and create the conditions which his survival and happiness require.  Which means that they advocate reason, rights, freedom, and technological progress.  We shouldn't be surprised by the existence and degree of insane or outright stupid behavior on the part of those who deem themselves superior to us mere mortals.  The illusion of superiority allows the parasites who make up The Left (and National Socialists are Leftists) to exempt themselves from the rules of the Society of Consent that's the foundation of Western Civilization. 

It's the normal practice of Totalitarians to defame their victims, creating the illusion of legitimacy, before murdering them.  In dehumanizing the victims they're in fact dehumanizing themselves.  With a death toll of well over 100 million the Communists have thoroughly demonstrated that they're Enemies of Human Kind in General. 

Most Lefties couldn't identify the broad side of a barn even if they were standing in plain view of it.  Not yet, right?  Many years ago when I was working in contract security a woman asked me where the main post office was in downtown Minneapolis.  I pointed directly to the immense limestone building with the words UNITED STATES POST OFFICE in enormous letters literally chiseled in stone about a block away at the end of the street.  She said she couldn't see it.  I'm not kidding.
 

 

 

Thoughts Of The Day

Adverse people often say bad things about those who uphold and enforce the law.  Americans dumped the British Monarchy so we can live under The Rule Of Law. Maxine Waters apparently opposes The Rule Of Law.  We hanged a bunch of opponents of The Rule Of Law at Nuremberg after The Second World War.  Perhaps we should erect the gallows once again.  

Hardcore realists are being called "transphobic."  No.  Reality is real.  Some people haven't learned to live with this fact.  Monsters don't realize they're monsters.

The Media in the context of a political contest has a function similar to that of a witness in a criminal trial.  By committing perjury the witness prevents the jury from issuing a correctly informed verdict.  The results of which are wrong, such as the conviction of an innocent individual, and could be disastrous, like the acquittal of a murderous psychopath.  Thus the act of perjury must be treated as a punishable crime.  Similarly, when the Media misinforms the electorate the result can be disastrous.  Such as the election on an individual who is philosophically and experientially unfit to hold the office.  But we're not supposed to hold reporters and publishers responsible for those destructive actions.

The point of having a First Amendment was that the voters would be properly informed about their elected officials and those who were seeking public office.  Instead we have an Established Media whose members have, on the basis of party affiliation, slandered a sitting president and refused to report on the malignant behavior of a presidential candidate.  This is a gross and deliberate violation of the public trust. And while this wouldn't necessarily bring about a repeal of the First Amendment it may cause some to interpret it in a manner that's less tolerant of the present forms of media malfeasance.

Why don't I call for Censorship?  Censorship is an exercise of state power carried out with the credible threat of deadly force.  Censorship is an act that reduces Human Beings to the effective status of livestock.  It's time we build the Joseph Goebbels Memorial Gallows for those members of the Fourth Estate who insist on inciting violence against innocent people.  There's simply no excuse for such behavior.

Suggestion

Actually no, being elected (or in the case of Joe Biden, "elected") isn't an excuse for totalitarian socialist behavior of any degree.  If The Left in America can't live with this then I'm afraid that we'll have to see to it that they don't.  In any case we need to start working right [expletive] now to defeat Joe Biden.

Or else.
 

Ahem..

Here is a message for all those whiny narcissistic jerks who have taken upon themselves the task of apologizing for Americans simply existing:  

Thoughts Of The Day

The Left appears to have serious difficulty with certain very basic concepts, such as Reality.  What The Left is doing looks a lot like the Puritan or Prohibitionist mode of behavior transferred to other areas of public policy.  We should remember that continued support for Prohibition had seriously hurt the Republicans in the 1932 election.  Even Ayn Rand had voted for FDR that year.  The Republicans could really go to town and make significant gains by opposing the Democrat's idiotic technopuritan policies, but that would mean having to give up their own idiotic practice of doing politics as usual.

The difference between being evil and being stupid is basically a matter of style.

We don't need to make the effort to mentally dehumanize our enemies when they have already chosen to dehumanize themselves. 

To govern is to restrain, those who can't or won't restrain themselves have no place in a social institution whose function is to restrain others. 

The pen and sword have always been together through the course of Western Civilization and can't be practically separated.  Anyone who believes that they can do no wrong, WILL do wrong.  Count on it.
 

Thoughts Of The Day

 Falci should have his medical license revoked.

A mere pacifist, one who disdains violence without engaging in political action, is simply a moral parasite in a free nation.  On the other hand a politically active pacifist, one who uses his vote or an elective office to interfere with the prosecution of violent criminals and the defense of a free nation, is a traitor who cloaks his actions in the shroud of righteousness.

History Lesson

When I was a teenage boy growing up, I was contacted by a recruiter for the Unification Church on the Nicollet Mall.  I stated I was an atheist and she thanked me for my time and went away.  This may have been the first time I came out as an atheist.

Quote Of Day

“Fascism, Nazism, Communism and Socialism are only superficial variations of the same monstrous theme—collectivism."

-- Ayn Rand

On Fascism

If there’s a common myth I want to bury it’s the notion that Fascism’s a right ring doctrine.  The notion that's Fascism’s a right ring doctrine began in the Kremlin.  So what’s a Fascist?  Check your own beliefs.  Do you want power over another person?  If the answer’s no, you’ll never be a Fascist or any other brand of statist trash.  When someone wants power over another person, they’re a Fascist or other brand of statist trash.  As that idiot Mussolini said, everything must be within the state and nothing outside of it.  And criticism of the State was a crime under the doctrine of Fascism.  This is why the Fascist or any other form of totalitarian state always fails.  This is why the Soviet state also failed.  In reality someone who believes they’re infallible will always fail.

Suggestion

Joe Biden isn't the president of the United States, live with it.

Thoughts Of The Day

There's atheism and then there's Atheism.  Mere atheism is simply disbelief in the divine and as such is not a holy cause to which all other actions are subordinated, nor is it a affirmative virtue which cancels out all other personal faults. Whereas Atheism with the big "A" takes what is otherwise a simple philosophical position and blows it up into an illusion of positive virtue.  Atheism with a big "A" allows dull and ordinary people to feel and pose as if they were somehow superior to the mass of humanity. Atheism with a big "A" also provides reactionary garbage such as the Marxists a means to pose as some kind of progressive vanguard when in fact they are simply putting a philosophical polish on the neolithic practice of beating up and killing people and taking their stuff.  As a mere atheist all I have to say to the big "A" professional Atheists is, "go home, grow up, and get a life!"

Political power must be limited or else it'll overwhelm us. The State, like fire, can be useful but it must be limited.

Bad people NEVER think of themselves as being bad people.

 

Thoughts Of The Day

No secret hideout should be without a redhead.  

Cheaters will eventually be caught.  Cheaters, like The Democratic Party, need to be removed.

Racism Alert

 The membership of Black Lives Matter are actually practicing racism.

On Gun Control

A firearm is simply a tool.  A tool is simply a means to an end, the ultimate end is Human Life.  We must understand that a fear of tools is simply irrational.  An employee of the Healtheast Care System in St. Paul was afraid of an image of several firearms on a coffee cup used by one of the security guards.  A customer at a supermarket was afraid of the light of a bar code scanner touching her groceries.  A firearm and a bar code scanner are simply tools.  There is no reason to fear them.  Alcoholism wasn’t caused by a supply of alcohol but by the alcoholics.  The Holocaust wasn’t caused by a supply of Zyklon-B, but by the beliefs of the perpetrators.  Zyklon-B was developed and marketed as an insecticide.  The Oklahoma City Bombing wasn’t caused by a supply of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil, but by the beliefs of perpetrators.  9/11 wasn’t caused by airliners and box cutters but by the beliefs of perpetrators.  Any horror wasn’t caused by the tools that were used but by the beliefs of the perpetrators.  There's simply no reason to fear a tool.

Anniversary

 On this day in 1945 the Second World War ended in Europe.  The war in Europe didn't end on the Soviet "Victory Day."

The Second World War ended in Europe when Hitler ran out of grandfathers and boys to shove between himself and the Soviet Army.

Suggestion

 I have a suggestion.

Let’s stop calling ourselves conservatives.

Those who refer to themselves as Progressives haven’t had a new idea since the neolithic era, and that was to beat up people and take their stuff.  WE ARE THE REAL PROGRESSIVES HERE AND NOW.

Thoughts Of The Day

Many of the members of Anti-Fa are actually practicing parts of the doctrine of Fascismo.  It used to be that racist assholes who joined lynch mobs wore hoods, now they wear hoodies.  The one thing that the willfully depraved are loathe to do is to acknowledge the fact that there're people who're in fact better in some respect than they are.  To make such an acknowledgement is to issue an indictment of themselves and their own actions.  The willfully depraved will murder individuals or even exterminate entire nations before they will recognize the truth about themselves.  I'm having to rely on unreliable people.

We didn't dump the monarchy to be ruled by a bunch of idiots.  George III could pass a Turing test.  Sheila Jackson Lee couldn't pass a Turing test even if she cheated on it.

One of the problems with seeing one's self as being infallible is that one tends to take a slack attitude towards doing one's own research.  This usually leads to the tendency to commit errors.   The overall effect is that those who believe in their own infallibility are inevitably finding themselves in the failure mode.  The original National Socialists in Germany had to establish a Reichsministry to bring the press under control.  The American media is voluntarily covering the backside of our glorious and unelected Fuherer.

Admission

Many of the people we look down upon actually believe they’re right.  Serial killers, National Socialists, and members of Anti-Fa are cases in point.  Admission that one can be ignorant is the beginning of wisdom.  Admission that one can be wrong is the beginning of being right.

Anniversary

Today is the anniversary of what is commonly called The Kent State Massacre.  Or the day a mob of nihilist punks came into contact with reality.

If there is one thing I've certainly noticed it's that pacifists in general have no objection to enjoying the benefits of civilization but are unwilling to take the measures necessary to defend it from foreign and domestic barbarians.  Such as the National Socialists, the Soviet Socialists, and the home grown socialists of the Democratic Party.  Contrary to their general delusion of virtue, pacifists are in effect, moral and political parasites upon civilized society.

Peace in the real world is simply the absence of those, such as the socialists, who seek to deprive you, I, and our fellow citizens of our own Life, Liberty, and Property.  Real peace can only be achieved by the physical isolation or outright elimination of those who seek to subjugate, plunder and murder us.  This can only be done through the use of physical force.  In short, true peace can only be achieved only through the possession of superior firepower and the moral will to use it.

The narcissistic trash that makes up the membership of the so-called peace movement simply don't care whether you and your children live, or die, or suffer under the yoke of an unwashed barbarian.  They plaster their cars with bumper sticker, carry signs, bang on drums, throw Frisbees, and perform other useless rituals so that they can feel good about themselves and show the world how morally superior they are.  Never mind that they openly deny the fundamental fact which is the foundation of all valid moral law, that Human Life, life as a rational being in control of one's own life, is the standard of all moral values, and that those who would damage or destroy Human Life must be removed from human society and if necessary be destroyed.   The adherents of pacifism have so inverted their own mental processes that they look upon the perpetrators of mass slavery and mass murder as good and those who take up arms to defend the society of consent as the most depraved evil.

Now there are some folks, who regard themselves as morally superior beings, who question why the other bastard has to die. The answer of course is that the other bastard is attempting to impose his will, or the will of his leader, upon you by force. It is the act of coercion by force that makes what General Patton called the other bastard an enemy. Peace is simply the absence of enemies. But there are some folks, who pretend to be morally superior beings, who would have us believe that "peace" could be achieved by submission to the will of the other bastard. In reality this is not peace, it is slavery. There are some well meaning people, some of whom that I respect, who believe that there are times that one cannot have both peace and freedom at the same time. I have to disagree. Liberty is simply the condition of existence in which the person is free to live his own life in accordance with his own rational judgment. This does of course require the absence of some other bastard who is attempting to impose his will upon the person by force. In practical terms real peace and real freedom are inseparable. I will go further is saying that to a civilized person, peace, freedom, and security, are simply three words that can be used to describe the identical condition, the absence of another bastard imposing his will upon the civilized person.  Contrary to what those who describe themselves as peace activists would have us believe, and as General Patton has ably demonstrated, the path to real peace invariably takes us over the real dead bodies of those other bastards who insist on violently imposing their will upon us. Unfortunately this process is by no means a safe one.

A rational study of the real world would show that a real state of Peace is effectively indistinguishable from a state of Liberty and a state of Security. Peace, Liberty, and Security are simply three words that a rational person uses to describe the same condition, the rightful ability to live one's own life without coercive interference by others. A rational study of actual history would show that the state of peace for the citizens of a free nation is the result of the violent elimination of the would be conquerors and their pet quislings. If we rationally examine those who constitute the membership of the so-called Peace Movement we find that virtually every one of them is an open advocate of the coercive subjugation of the productive members of the Human Race. The occasional exception being a self-blinded fool who isn't paying attention to what they're ideologically in bed with. In short, a "peace activist" and the "peace movement" are in fact enemies of Peace.

Peace is only an affirmative value to those who live in the condition of liberty, that is being rightfully in charge of one's self and able to set the goals for one's own life. Peace can't be a value to the subjects of a totalitarian socialist state.  To the victim of such a state, the ordinary worker who's bullied by a commissar, the inmate of a slave labor camp, or the occupant of a darkened cell awaiting murder at the hands of the local chekists, war, either an internal uprising against the socialist masters, or an invasion by an army of liberation, is in fact the positive value.

What are your questions on this block of instruction?

 

Thoughts Of The Day

Many of the people who are conned don't want to believe they've been conned.  From the objective perspective Scientology is clearly a con job.

Antisemitism in politics is the practical equivalent of a dead canary in a coal mine, I can't say this often enough.  Antisemitism is a subset of Racial Collectivism.  We have to condemn all forms of Racial Collectivism.  We have to identify Black Lives Matter as the Racial Collectivist group that it actually is.  We have to see that Antisemitism is a symptom of a deeper philosophical problem.  Rejection of Racial Collectivism shouldn't be a radical idea.

Our self proclaimed president's, Joe Biden's, choice to head the BATF was one of the perpetrators of the Waco Massacre.

 

It's Happening Again

 Why did The Holocaust happen?

The actual author of the Book of Genesis actually had a point: Evil often presents itself as Good.

The Holocaust wasn't a unique event.  The Holocaust (and other horrors) were the result of normal people acting normally.  Why did a particular horror happen?  There's an answer but you may not like it.  A horror happened because the perpetrators believed they were good people with their victims and opponents being evil.  We've seen this before with numerous horrors and it will happen again.  What we're dealing with are people who believe they're good people.  We have to deal with them as such no matter how horrible the things they actually do.  Many of the people who’re loudly proclaiming “never again” are going to do it again.  The National Socialists and Soviets believed themselves to be good people, we're seeing the same phenomena with Anti-Fa.  Anti-Fa claims to be opposed to Fascism no matter what they actually do.  Anti-Fa does the things that Fascists actually do.  Members of Anti-Fa will believe the lies they're told regardless of the consequences.  Members of Anti-Fa claim to oppose Fascism, in fact they're what Fascists are.  Most members of Anti-Fa don't know that they're following the dictators handbook.  Most proponents of tyranny, such as members of Anti-Fa (National Socialists, Soviet Communists, etc.) believe they're good people and that their opponents are evil.  If a dogma requires the commission of a vile act then that act WILL be committed.  When someone denies their own Humanity then they WILL commit crimes against Humanity.  It's very easy to predict what a self appointed opponent of Fascism will say.  Just take a mouth dropping of a National Socialist and replace the word Jew with the word Fascist.

Those who don't remember history are a highly sought after group of followers.  We identify The Holocaust as the horrible act it actually was.  And we should be horrified.  But we're seeing The Holocaust from an objective perspective.  From the subjective perspective the perpetrators of The Holocaust saw themselves (apart from some psychopaths) as being good people doing good things with their victims and opponents as being evil.  We're seeing this again with the Marxists who make up the membership of Anti-fa.  They see themselves as being good and their victims as being evil.  I've said this before: Killing a Marxist isn't an act of murder, it's an act of self defense.  I have a warning for members of Anti-fa, when you Brownshirt someone, don't be surprised that you're treated as a Brownshirt.  I've found through direct experience that the opposition really believe they're the good guys.  If a member of Anti-fa wants to see a Totalitarian, all they have to do is look in a mirror.  Totalitarians are never hiding under the bed, they're in plain view.  For those who value power no act is too vile.  Killing a member of Anti-Fa isn't an act of murder, it's an act of self defense.  Members of Anti-fa should be engaged with aircraft like the AC-130 and A-10.  A Fascist isn't who the self styled opponents of the doctrine believe they are.  WE HAVE THE DUTY to see the self described antifascist as they truly are a National Socialist piece of shit who should be hanged from the neck until dead.  And WE HAVE THE DUTY to identify the Mainstream Media are a bunch of liars.  Once a difference in opinion is criminalized a civil war is inevitable.

Voltaire said it: Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities.

I have a question for members of Anti-Fa and BLM: what part of "Never Again" didn't you understand?

(Thanks to Mark Urbin@No Moss Here for the images)

Why don't we assassinate Joe Biden and/or Kamala Harris?  Because their assassinations won't solve the problem.  The actual problem is a culture that holds the rights of individuals in contempt.  The assassination of Biden and/or Harris won't solve that problem.

 

Holiday

Happy Mass Murder day.

Once again we come to May First.

Karl Marx didn't work.  Neither does Marxism.  Marxism should be taught as the actual disaster it was. 

Marxism doesn't work.  But that doesn't stop Marxists from trying.

Marx was racist as shit even for the time.  He hated black and Jewish people with a passion.  His views on Jews were very similar to those of the Nazis.  People who knew him said he mocked and despised his followers as much as the “bourgeoisie” and felt superior to pretty much everyone.  Gustav Techow said “personal domination is the end-all of his every activity”

Marx was the L. Ron Hubbard of his day.  A useless, evil piece of shit who managed to amass a following among other useless, evil pieces of shit and others who were too dim to know better.

(I got this from Mark Urbin's tumblr page)

 

Why don't we assassinate Joe Biden and/or Kamala Harris?  Because their assassinations won't solve the problem.  The actual problem is a culture that holds the rights of individuals in contempt.  The assassination of Biden and/or Harris won't solve that problem.

This is the day on which Leftists traditionally shout out their claim to be morally superior beings who are entitled to rule over us mere humans and take the product of our thought and labor to use as they they see fit for the betterment of mankind.  And if you really believe their claims then obviously you won't notice the pile of the one hundred million-plus human bodies that the self styled agents of progress have left in their wake as they've made their way to power and willfully abused that power over us mere humans.  When we see through the ideology and other claims of The Left it's very readily apparent that their doctrine is nothing more than a modernistic facade placed over the old stone age practice of beating up or killing people and taking their stuff.  It's time that we see The Left for what they truly are, not as the vanguard of moral progress, but only a gang of thieves and murderers.

It's simply isn't possible to reason with, negotiate with, or otherwise peacefully coexist with any person, any group, or any nation, that believes that it has the right to control you or to take things from you by force.  Such persons or entities can only be physically isolated from you or ultimately destroyed.  There's a way to deal with Marxists and it's not nice.

Peace is the absence of enemies but it isn't, as some wish to believe, priceless.  As long as there's one communist who lives there'll be no peace.
 
One of things I usually do on May Day is to repost the Affirmations for the Inner Communist, Ayn Rand once said that it was morally acceptable mock evil as long as it was recognized as evil. So once again I present:

Stuart Smalley's Daily Affirmations for the Inner Communist

Monday:

"I'm going to execute and expropriate today just for the heck of it because, gosh darn it, I deserve to have a good time."

Tuesday:

"I am not a fraud, a Marxist yes, but not a fraud."

Wednesday:

"I deserve all the mass adulation from the people I can get without feeling ashamed or being grandiose."

Thursday:

"I will express my feelings today. I will not hide them behind my mustache. My mustache is not a mask for my feelings, but rather a small patch of facial hair that covers my inadequacies."

Friday:

"When I rob a bank for the cause, I will not be playing those parent tapes in my head: "You wield a revolver like a girl" . . . "Why can't you be more like Stalin?" . . . "Philosophy? What kind of major is that? It's useless!"

Saturday:

"Just because I execute Christians and counter-revolutionaries does not mean I'm an mass-murdering psychopath like my father."

Sunday:

"If I must violently put down a counter-revolution today, it is not because I am a bad person or that I am not worthy of love; it is because my people are a bunch of religion-addicted capitalist sons-of-bitches--and I am mean enough, ruthless enough, and dog gone it, people fear me."

The theory of Communism was invented by a group of professional parasites in order to give the appearance of modernity and moral legitimacy to the stone-age practice of beating-up and killing productive people and taking their stuff. Of course that is about the nicest description I could give to it. Normally I think of the practice of Communism as being the behavior of those who chose to act as sub-human predatory animals. And as with any other predatory animal that attacks human beings I believe that they should be hunted down and killed. Parasite mentalities as a general rule see themselves as superior beings and other people, the productive population, exist solely as either tools that they can use to pursue their goals or as trash to be disposed of. Killing those who rightfully refuse to be the slaves of the self-appointed superior beings is not an act of murder, in their minds it's simply the disposal of hominid garbage. In practical terms a Communist is a mortal enemy of human kind and killing a Communist can be no more wrongful than putting down a rabid animal or destroying any other active hazard to human life.

The fact of the matter is that the self-described "Peace Activist" doesn't act out of conscience but out of a fraudulent desire to pose as a morally superior being without any regard for the millions of innocents that they condemn to death and servitude.  A "Peace Activist" is a willing accessory to the acts of mass slavery and mass murders committed by the various adherents of toxic ideologies such as Socialism and Islam.  Killing a "Peace Activist" isn't an act of murder, it's in effect the putting down of a diseased animal which is a demonstrated hazard to innocent Human Life.

A Democratic Socialist is still a Socialist, still an Enemy of Mankind, and still a Murderer.

 How many people have Marxists murdered?

Over 3200 a day on average a day during the Cold War.

A basic premise of Collectivism is that all people need a leader to think for them and to collectively direct their lives. In the Collectivist view the Russians needed a big brother or father figure such as Stalin or Lenin, the Chinese needed a Mao, the Koreans (not just in the north) needed the Kim Dynasty.  And we in the United States absolutely require the guidance of the self styled opponents of Fascism.

(Of course any sympathies the Left ever had for fellow socialists like the Austrian Corporal or the Loud Mouthed Italian fellow have been quietly dropped down the memory hole.)

This is, of course, is a total fantasy.  The Shepherd Fantasy appears to be a psychological device that Collectivists use to evade knowledge of, or to mentally blank out, the fact that they're not really useful members of a human society but are truly nothing more than a bunch of parasites and outright predators who're feeding off their betters.

As Ayn Rand once pointed out, they need us. We on the other hand, have absolutely no use for them.

So why won’t the Collectivists get out of the way of those of us who live in the Real World?

Because they know that sooner or later, we'll properly identify them for what they are, and that we'll eventually turn our guns upon them.  Which is why they favor Gun Control.  How many people have died escaping from capitalism?

 "Better see the Reds dead!"

--Ayn Rand

"To send men to the firing squad Judicial proof is unnecessary.  These procedures are an archaic bourgeois detail.  This is a revolution and a revolutionary must become a cold killing machine motivated by pure hate."

--Che Guevara, Marxist Murderer

Those who dehumanize themselves can't claim protection under a human right.  Killing a Marxist is no more an act of murder than putting down a rabid dog or eliminating any other hazard to Human Life.

Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot died peacefully instead of properly at the end of a rope.  Socialism was the most toxic ideology promoted in the previous century, there's no excuse to promote it.

If The Democrats want to behave like Socialists, fine.  Let's treat them like Socialists like other Collectivists, in the Nuremberg style, from the neck until dead.  Many people on The Left scream about selfishness, but are the most selfish people out there.  Many people on The Left use other people to feel good about themselves.

And we still have May Day.  Anyone in favor of candlelight vigil to remember the victims of Communism?

From the absolute origin the doctrine of Communism was the result of the rejection of Reason.  In fact the doctrine of Communism is essentially an excuse to behave as predatory animals.  Thus all conceptions of a moral law, including virtually all laws based on the doctrine of a religion*, must be rejected outright.  As God is held to be the author of moral law in the Western Monotheist Tradition his existence must be denied by the practicing Communist.  This leads to the posture of Communists of being Atheists.  The fact is power over productive people is fundamental goal of the practicing Communist and therefore they'll use any excuse, or body of excuses such as Liberation Theology, to obtain it.  

 (Image from Mark Urbin.)

Another Image.

 

A good Communist. 

 

 

 

We need to understand that Anti-Fa is a Collectivist group along with needing to be identified as and dealt with as such.  We need to understand that Black Lives Matter is a Racial Collectivist group along with needing to be identified as and dealt with as such.