Freedom Conspiracy

Gary Greenberg's political blog: Promoting Agoranism, a system of political organization based on free trade, private ownership of property, voluntary contracts, and no soverreign governments.

It’s from National Review, so there should be a few clunkers from the Libertarian point of view. You’ll probably find a few you like here.

Number 10 is “20th Century Man” by the Kinks, which is from their “Muswell Hillbillies” album, which, during the years I actually listened to pop music, I thought the album, as a concept album was one of the most libertarian-friendly pop albums ever made.

I was a Kinks fan back then. Another of their libertarian friendly album was “Arthur (Or the decline and fall of the British Empire)” about a family moving to Australia to avoid the draft.

Another good Kinks album was “Lola versus Powerman and the Moneygoround,”, a critique of the music industry, which includes the infamous song “Lola” about sexual appearances and preferences (“Girls will be boys and boys will be girls It’s a mixed up, muddled up, sup world, except for Lola” as well as “Get back in line”, which includes the lyric, “‘Cos when I see that union man walking down the street, He’s the man who decides if I live or I die, if I starve, or I eat.”

How gun-free zones invite mass shootings

How gun-free zones invite mass shootings. As they say, read the whole thing

By John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center and the author most recently of “The War on Guns.”

“This doesn’t happen anywhere else on the planet,” said California’s Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom. “We stand alone in the world in the number of mass shootings,” echoed U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. These were typical comments after an alleged shooter murdered 12 people in Borderline Bar & Grill in Thousand Oaks, Calif.

 

People have been acting for a long time like the United States is the world’s hotbed of mass public shootings. Following a 2015 mass shooting during his administration, President Barack Obama declared: “The one thing we do know is that we have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world.”

This belief is constantly used to push for more gun control. If we can only get rid of guns in the United States, we will get rid of these mass public shootings and be more like the rest of the world, gun-control supporters preach.

 

But America doesn’t lead the world in mass public shootings. We’re not even close. Just last month, a school shooting in Crimea, Russia, claimed 20 lives and wounded 65 others. But Americans usually don’t hear about such events.

 

The Crime Prevention Research Center, of which I am president, recently finished updating a list of mass public shootings worldwide. These shootings must claim four or more lives in a public place. Following the FBI definition, the shootings we list are carried out simply with the intention of killing. We exclude gang fights because they tend to be motivated by battles for drug turf. Murders that arise from other crimes are also excluded.

“Ignorance of the Law” should be a defense.

The concept that ignorance of the law is no defense, originates in a time when there were few laws. For the average person, law was simple. Don’t steal. Don’t cheat. Don’t hurt the innocent. Pay your taxes (Yawwww!) and don’t hunt in the king’s woods. A couple of hundred years ago, that was about all anyone would need to know about the law. Religious rulers added a few nutty overlays., but those were pounded into your brain by religious teachers in the community.

Nowadays. we have hundreds of thousands of laws, regulations, and rules that can get you into trouble. In many case you not only have to be familiar with all of these laws, and the thousands and thousands of court decisions in every jurisdiction, you on occasion have to know the laws and rules of every other country in the world and its attendant bureaucracies. Violate the foreign countries laws, rules and regulations while doing business from the United States with someone in another country, which activity is handled pursuant to all the legal laws, rules and regulations of the United States, and in many instances, you can be prosecuted here for violating the foreign laws there.

So, my suggestion.

In every criminal proceeding, a defendant should be permitted as a matter of law, to argue to the jury that 1) the defendant was unaware that the action was illegal, 2) no reasonable person would have thought that action to be illegal, and 3) a person situated in the same social/work environments as the defendant would have no reason to know that the action was illegal. In any prosecution where such a defense is raised, the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that at least one of the three premises is not true for the defendant. If the prosecutor fails to make that case, the jury must acquit the defendant.

It should also go without saying that in every trial, the judge must tell the jury that if in the jury’s judgment, convicting a defendant of the charged crime would be unjust, they would have the right to acquit the defendant even if it believes the defendant violated the law. This is the basic principle of jury nullification.

Sen. Warren and Cultural Obliteration

It’s not often noticed, but the Hitler-style racial identity politics of the Democratic Party base often works to obliterate the cultural identities of the people being offered special racial advantages. The recent Elizabeth Warren DNA fiasco illustrates that somewhat.

To briefly summarize, Warren spent much of her professional career claiming to be part Cherokee Indian and used that in her various biographies and Harvard used it in their faculty identifications. The claim was generally recognized as utter nonsense and critics challenged her to take DNA tests. How many secret tests she took before finding one that could even hint at the vague possibility that it might be possible, we don’t know, and the recent test results that she released provide zero evidence that she is of Cherokee heritage.

The report said only that there was a possibility that 6 to 10 generations ago there “might” be a possibility that she had “Native American” DNA. The public debate over this report bounced around between See, her claim is true to the possibility she is only 1/64th or 1/1024th possibility that it is true but the amount is so little that it is the equivalent of the old Democratic Party slavery view that one drop of negro blood makes you a negro. Both sides are wrong, and that is where the cultural suppression begins.

To begin with, there is no such thing as a “Native American.” Human life, according to all current scientific theories, began in Africa, probably in Ethiopia. Migrants from that initial grouping formed all the different races and ethnic groupings all over the world. The Americas were inhabited by different immigrant groups, from different cultures, with different genetic bases, arriving by different routes, at different times and places. The earliest arrivals probably came over a no-longer existing land bridge between Asia and Alaska.

To put it simply, Cherokees, Incas and Aztecs are not the same people, the same culture, or the same genetic group. In the DNA bases for ethnic groups there is no meaningful sample of Cherokees. The database used to prove Warrens bona fides consisted of Peruvians and Mexicans, some of whom may already have had genetic traits resulting from interbreeding with other genetic groups.

So when people say that Warren proved her case or only has a tiny percentage of “Native American” DNA they are saying, in principle, that there is no cultural or genetic difference between Cherokees and Incas and Aztecs. This is nonsense. There is zero evidence that Liz Warren is a Cherokee and the attempt to meld Cherokees in with Aztecs and Incas is a form of racism and cultural obliteration. But that’s what race-identity politics does to a culture.

The Minimum Wage is Always Zero

A major impact of the minimum wage laws is the large number of people that will be thrown out of work. A Congressional Budget Office study in 2014 indicated that a minimum wage increase to $9 an hour would cost 100,000 jobs, and an increase to $10.10 would result in the loss of over 500,000 jobs. Those are nation-wide figures. For people laid off due to minimum wage hikes, the minimum wage is always zero. And many lives will be thoroughly destroyed by the loss of the marginal income that enabled families to survive.

Often overlooked in these analyses and debates is that it is not only minimum wage earners who get thrown out of work, but also includes a large percentage of people who earn more than the minimum wage because management can no longer afford the differential between different pay levels for different skill sets.

In 2018, the NYC minimum wage went up to $13 an hour in the hospitality industry and had a devasting impact on the restaurant industry. In 2019, the rate goes to $15 an hour. Have you noticed the rapidly increased use of ordering kiosks in fast-food restaurants that replace many workers? Some places are now experimenting with automated burger-flippers. Wonder where that will lead.

It’s often argued that the low minimum wage does not pay enough for an individual’s survival. That people still take the jobs is evidence that this is not the case. In many instances, the wages received are increments to a family income that includes family members with other sources of income, sometimes from jobs that pay more than the minimum wage.

Let the WWII round-ups begin again

National Socialist parakeet Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Bernie-sis liberal running for Congress in NYC, says we should follow America’s WWII blueprint for defeating the enemies of climate cargo cultists. A key element of America’s WWII blueprint involved the Democratic party (through President Roosevelt) rounding up over 100,000 Americans on racial grounds (Japanese backgrounds) and throwing them into internment camps, with no hearings or guidelines for determining whether any of the detainees were security threats.

The Democratic base (dominated by climate cultists) has openly designated Caucasians as a deplorable people who, among other crimes,  oppose the Ocasio-Cortez war footing on climate control. Ask many (most?) of them and I am sure they will propose that these Caucasians be locked away in gulags and sent to carbon-neutral gas ovens.

Sorry, but I won’t get aboard that train.

Socialism, by definition, equals slavery. Well isn’t that idealistic?

Recent studies show that our ill-educated millennials think that socialism is cool. I don’t think they know what socialism is. They seem to think its some sort of system where Mom and Dad, or the next door neighbor, work at their favorite fun jobs while subsidizing the kid who wants to hang out with the BFFs at the café, sipping coffee made from only the most expensive beans, or nightclub hop while checking their social media and Instagramming their lovely cocktail, or expound to whoever will listen about what a rotten job their better-educated parents made of the world, or furiously argue over which movie or pop song was coolest. Oops.

Given how idealistic these folks are, I thought I would help them understand where there ideals lead.
…Continue Reading “Socialism, by definition, equals slavery. Well isn’t that idealistic?”

On privatizing space travel

Walter Block has recently co-authored a new book on Space capitalism: the case for privatizing space travel and colonization. (Palgrave Macmillan). He discussed the book on C-SPAN and gives the following links to the video.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?448910-4/space-capitalism;

https://mises.org/power-market/walter-block-talks-space-capitalism-cspan;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/hey-im-on-tv-c-span/

Antifa or Antefa?: Let me help you with the spelling

Across the country, primarily on campuses and in urban environments, violent racist psychotic thugs make war against human freedom. Calling themselves Antifa they combine Hitler’s socialist economic policies with his race-identity politics, and sharing his goal of sending tens of millions of “deplorable” inhabitants, defined by their ethnic or religious characteristics, to the gas chambers and/or gulags.

Given the conflict between their self-chosen name and their political beliefs, it occurred to me that these ill-educated terrorists may have accidentally misspelled their group identity, not aware that there was a difference between Antifa and Antefa. The latter means, per their nomenclature, “before Fascism.” That makes much more sense. Correcting the spelling more accurately identifies them as the “Fascist Vanguard” seeking to bring Hitler’s philosophy to the United States. These aren’t “neo-Nazis”; they are “paleo-Nazis,” and should be treated as such.

Given their influence on the Democratic Party, it’s not surprising that Sen Elizabeth Warren recently proposed a new economic program that is virtually indistinguishable from the classic fascist economic policies of Hitler and Mussolini. It’s time for the Democratic Party to start cleaning house and rid itself of its growing horde of stormtroopers marinating in Hitler’s worst political sauces.

Is the carbon tax a crime against humanity?

Bjorn Lomborg is a prominent environmentalist who believes in global warming. But he is controversial in that he compares the impact on humans caused by proposed solutions against the alternative of not implementing such solutions. In a recent essay, he discusses the horrific impact of the global carbon tax on the world’s poor as well as such other things as the harm to poor people that would arise by implementing the Paris climate accords. He writes,

When a “solution” to a problem causes more damage than the problem, policymaking has gone awry. That’s where we often find ourselves with global warming today.

Activist organizations like Worldwatch argue that higher temperatures will make more people hungry, so drastic carbon cuts are needed. But a comprehensive new study published in Nature Climate Change led by researchers from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis has found that strong global climate action would cause far more hunger and food insecurity than climate change itself. . . Trying to help 24 million people by imperiling 78 million people’s lives is a very poor policy (My emphasis.)

 

Read the whole thing. If his numbers are even remotely correct, the advocates of a carbon tax and related proposals are promoting a world-wide holocaust that dwarfs Hitler’s (and zooms toward the over hundred million victims murdered by Communism). They should be denounced for advocating “crimes against humanity.”