L. Neil Smith's THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 891, September 25, 2016
go to prison, but her advocacy of
gun control is the most important.
Previous
Contents
Next
Send Letters to editor@ncc-1776.org
Note: All letters to this address will be considered for
publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication
[Letters to the editor are welcome on any and all subjects. Sign your
letter in the text body with your name and e-mail address as you wish
them to appear, otherwise we will use the information in the "From:"
header!]
In response to “I Pledge Allegiance to the Fraud…” by L. Neil Smith
I make no bones about being a minarchist rather than an anarchocapitalist, because in general I don't believe that (all of) our statists are as bad, or worse, than their statists (except in the sense that ours have to be supremely stupid, gullible, or culpable not to see the advantages freedom has brought to the United States). The Constitution is supposed to keep our statists from getting a finger hold (OK, I submit to the unanswerable rhetorical question, “How is that working out?”); the “provide for the common defense” clauses—the most significant of which is the one that begins “a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state…”—are intended to make sure that their statists keep their distance from the US and it's freedoms.
In response to your comments about US wars:
I have never heard that interpretation of the War of 1812; probably to be expected, since I grew up on the American version of the story. Judging from the Wikipedia rendition of the war, that interpretation might be an accurate rendition of what the Canadians are taught in schools. The bottom line appears to be provocations on both sides (with the British kidnapping of American merchant sailors to impress into their naval forces during the Napoleonic conflicts being a major factor on our side).
World War I: It's hard to view things from a century remove, but the supposed trigger of US involvement in World War I was the Zimmerman telegram, offering German funding to support Mexico in an effort to retake Texas in the event the US entered the war—based on German intent to resume attacking US shipping. Certainly the war on the continent was a family squabble that got seriously out of control (my favorite rendition in fiction being Writ in Blood, wherein Chelsea Quinn Yarbro's vampire Saint-Germain finds himself trying unsuccessfully to convince the various close inbreds who ruled Europe not to let their food fight escalate). But given the Zimmerman telegraph, I could easily have seen myself joining the course saying “up yours, Willie.” And—like the 1000 Airship Flight—that was a volunteer force (for fictional takes on the US side of the fight, including how it was screwed up, of course, see Mr. Heinlein's Time Enough for Love and To Sail Beyond the Sunset). In any event, one can certainly argue that attacking US shipping and a war by Mexico and Germany to retake Texas was a threat to American liberty.
Korea and Vietnam were, arguably, also similar in intent to the 1000 Airship Flight—intended to protect the liberties of people under threat, in the context of “preventing Marx's nonsense from squeezing out freedom on half the planet,” to paraphrase Mr. Heinlein. However, they were fought mostly with drafted troops, ill- informed objectives, inadequate resources, and (increasingly through their course) without the consent of the American people. Both were left incomplete and unfinished, because neither had the will of the people behind them (and the Marxist-Progressive branch* of the “two in theory, one in practice” American Progressive Party favoring the “bad guys”). The world is certainly not a better place because they were incomplete; whether the world would be better if they had been either not started, or fought to completion, is left as an exercise for Harry Turtledove.
The Branch Davidians? There was, of course, no excuse for that. One of the better reasons for keeping that Decrepit Sociopath from the White House is her Codependent-Sociopath's ostensible leadership during that abuse. Unfortunately, I expect the Branch Davidian affair writ large will be the (intended) consequence of her fixation on terminating the Second Amendment. Be prepared.
Symbolism over substance? The American flag represents the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. The Star Spangled Banner, for all that it was written during a later war, symbolizes the struggle to maintain liberty. Abusing a symbol (as Mr. Smith said, by its use at Waco) does not change or tarnish what it stands for.
Mr. Kaepernick certainly has every right to claim that the symbols are tarnished and that he doesn't respect them because of the tarnish. His critics (and the people who ultimately pay his salary through their ticket purchases and watching advertisements on televised games) have an equal right to claim that he should respect the symbols for what they mean despite the tarnish. (To quote Mr. Heinlein—he really is a man for all occasions—again: “‘Do as thou wilt’ is the whole of the law—but remember that also applies to lynch mobs.”)
I say humans need symbolism—but also need to recognize when frauds use the symbols as cover for words or deeds contrary to the meaning they represent. Symbolism keeps substance alive through times of no substance (Star Trek TOS episode “The Omega Glory”—and “A Piece of the Action”), and most people have the presence of mind to recognize when symbolism and substance diverge.
Keep that in mind when the Decrepit Sociopath**—assuming her health problems or worried/conniving allies don't take her out of the running—wraps herself in the flag while coming to destroy the Constitution. Assuming she, or her handlers and allies, have the presence of mind to recognize any of this. (After all, as Mrs. Obama is alleged to have said during a flag folding ceremony, “all of this for a piece of cloth.”)
Notes
* With thanks to Mr. Smith again, the other group might best be called the “Rotarian-Socialist branch” of the American Progressive Party. Except that the “Rilly” Big Bucks mostly go from the “we figured out to game the system to profit while everyone else loses everything” branch of the financial market to the Marxist Branch of the Progressive Party—because how else to maximize their profits—and power—than by collapsing the system.
** John Ringo's The Last Centurion (Baen 2008) is an interesting take on 2018-2020 if the Decrepit Sociopath becomes President…
TJ Mason
tjmason@oneamericanvoice.me
Denial of the right to keep and bear arms is the human rights violation that makes all other human rights violations possible.
Was that worth reading?
Then why not:
Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author
Re: “Letter from Paul Bonneau”
Once again it seems as if my points have gone right over the head of Paul Bonneau. It's not that I care what other people believe. Hell, people are free to the believe that the earth is flat and that the moon is full of moldy cheese for all I care. I become concerned when bad ideas are put into practice. If we lived in a society where people weren't able to take bad ideas and turn them into bad policies, I probably wouldn't even give them a second thought. That is why they need to be countered at every turn because once they become policy, it's almost impossible to overturn them.
Now what concerns me about the creationists is that there are many who are still attempting to shove their beliefs down the throats of kids in government schools and since science scores are already pretty damn low to begin with, we really don't need creationist drivel to make it any worse. Until we get around to privatizing schools, we need to at least make sure that the kids are learning science and not religious dogma. Also, in order for our movement to triumph we are going to have to compete in the market place of ideas. So I hardly think that countering bad ideas is a waste of time.
Sean Gangol
rgangol@sbcglobal.net
Was that worth reading?
Then why not:
Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author
Re: “I Pledge Allegiance to the Fraud…” by L. Neil Smith
FWIW, Germany and Serbia were on opposite sides in WWI. Basically, the Serbs had allowed their chief of intelligence to run an organization in Austria-Hungary that ended up killing the Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife. Austria-Hungary went to war with Serbia, Russia jumped in to defend “their little Slavic brothers” and Germany got stuck in on Austria-Hungary's side.
I have commented elsewhere that this movement of ours needs more historians.
Eric Oppen
ravenclaweric@gmail.com
Was that worth reading?
Then why not:
Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author
Defensive voting
Re: “Letter from Paul Bonneau”
Mr. Bonneau, I understand your point about defensive vs. ordinary voting (and I have generally tried to vote defensively).
That said, the relative risk of nuclear war between the two candidates is not the only reason to vote. One candidate has announced support for the Second Amendment, and two that I know of (counting Mr. Weld) have announced their intent to eradicate it. (We’ll discount those who claim the first candidate is lying, for now, giving the certainty of how things will go on the other side. We’ll also lament that what now calls itself the Libertarian Party has aligned with the Party of Treason on this matter.)
I recall how the last systematic effort to disarm the American populace went (something about “a shot heard ‘round the world”). Being old (well, for my age), fat (indisputably), and slow, I know how well I could run, hide, and duck. So I assess my probability of surviving a gun confiscation campaign (absent capitulation, and possibly even given capitulation—not that I consider that an acceptable position) to be negligible.
Yes, I would consider a gun confiscation campaign to be an act of treason. However, I wouldn’t be available to write the history books afterward. And I’m not sure how this site will survive the pending takeover of the Internet by the globalists, so even this record is likely to be lost to posterity.
I would consider my vote defensive. As well as an effort to save the Decrepit Sociopath from committing treason. It’s for her own good—and for the children, of course.
Mr. Perez,
Consider the above an affirmation of your argument. In spades, with high casino.
TJ Mason
tjmason@oneamericanvoice.me
Was that worth reading?
Then why not:
Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author
Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund Endorses Donald J. Trump For President
It was a long time in coming.
Hardly what they wanted in the beginning; though at least this time around it's a better deal than trying to push some milk toast like Mitt Romney across the finish line—who by all appearances didn't want to win. After all that the GOP establishment had done to see to the destruction of each and every Tea Party favored candidate. I guess this turns out to be the way to stick it to not only Hillary Clinton and her progressive base but to the establishment republicans who absolutely loathe Donald Trump.
A few days ago I saw a Clinton campaign ad with all the usual suspects from the RINO crowd including Mitt Romney saying all kind of nasty things about Mr Trump. Talk about a lineup of sore losers begging to be thrown under the bus along with the Hildabeast and her ilk. It's going to be very fun sticking it to them!
Politics becomes an enjoyable spectator sport again. Yet it will be nice once it is done and over with so we don't have to see those annoying campaign commercials and fire starting material cluttering up our mailboxes for a while!
Jeff Fullerton
born2bewild1962@gmail.com
Was that worth reading?
Then why not:
Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author
Re: “Gun Control Is Treason” by L. Neil Smith [in this issue]
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
—Article 3, Section 3 US Constitution
Treason is the only crime defined in the Constitution. Not quite the dictionary definition. We legally overthrow the government (at least in theory) every time the party in power gets voted out. Arguably TLE is all bout overthrowing the existing government, or at least the “world order” it is based on.
Disarming the militia, which is defined as the whole of the adult population capable of bearing arms sure sounds like an act of war, even if we had no problems with political and religious fanatics and/or criminal gangs.
A.X. Perez
perez180ehs@hotmail.com
Was that worth reading?
Then why not:
Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author
Vote Against the Aristos
Hillary Clinton is the establishment candidate for President. At one time she was just the Democratic Party’s candidate but the majority of the people who voted GOP went and gave Donald Trump their Party’s nomination instead of giving it to a GOP Establishment apartchik.
Now we start hearing how the Average American is too bigoted, too ignorant, and just generally too not elite to have a democracy. The Establishment finds them deplorable. They can’t be trusted with the vote, with guns, or to manage their affairs. They must be ruled by an elite. So sayeth the would be elite.
The Founding Fathers feared a Mobocracy. But they also totally rejected rule by a self appointed aristocracy. So when some “academics” start talking about people needing to prove they are educated enough to vote, that they need to be disarmed, and that it’s time to move on to a post Constitutional America and give up our quaint notions of liberty I say “Futete atque equiis in qui adveniunt.”
Elite enough for you?
I distrust the mob also, but I distrust the members of any self appointed aristocracy more. Vote against the aristos.
A.X. Perez
perez180ehs@hotmail.com
Was that worth reading?
Then why not:
Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author
This site may receive compensation if a product is purchased
through one of our partner or affiliate referral links. You
already know that, of course, but this is part of the FTC Disclosure
Policy found here. (Warning: this is a 2,359,896-byte 53-page PDF file!)
TLE AFFILIATE
