Sign Of The Times

NORTHIOWATEAPARTY.COM

Eventually You Run Out Of Other People's Money

Walter Russell Mead is discussing the fact that anti-public union fever is not just for Wisconsin anymore. He comes up with a quote which is the perfect explanation for why the SIHTF.

From a state that is bluer than blue, ultraviolet Vermont, comes the news that Governor Peter Shumlin, a Democratic governor with solid Democratic majorities in both houses of the legislature, will not solve his state’s fiscal problems with a tax increase. Why? As Politico reports, “We’ve already got a progressive income tax in Vermont, and we can’t get more progressive because we’ll lose the few payers that we have,” Shumlin said in between sessions at the National Governors Association meeting. “We don’t have any more tax capacity.”

“I can see New Hampshire from my house,” said the governor, noting that Vermont is already losing business, investments and residents to its low-tax neighbor.

As Dame Margaret Thacher (a grocers daughter) is reputed to have said,

The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.

It looks like eventually has arrived.

H/T Instapundit

Cross Posted at Classical Values

The Problem With Socialists And Socialist Conservatives

Bill Whittle explains "The Problem With Socialists And Socialist Conservatives" in his review of the movie Forbidden Planet.

Forbidden Planet (Two-Disc 50th Anniversary DVD Edition)

This book is a further exposition on the subject:

God's Executioner: Oliver Cromwell and the Conquest of Ireland

And if that isn't enough for you I have a C.S. Lewis quote:

"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber barons cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - Clive Staples "CS" Lewis

Me? I'd rather not live under any form of socialism. As a wag once said of the "problem": "If you tell people what to do they will do the opposite. If you leave them alone they will do as they damn well please."

Short version: leaving people alone causes fewer problems.

H/T Instapundit

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Hate Is The Object

In my post Hating The Andromeda Galaxy I looked at the necessity of hate in politics. I discuss some of the repercussions of that in Strange Connection.

Today I came across a site discussing those very issues from a biological perspective. The Market for Sanctimony.

Two unspoken questions that religions and quasi-religions, in practice, have to answer are "Whom do I have permission to use as a scapegoat?" and "What lies may I tell myself in order to feel morally superior to my competitors?" In Jerry Falwell's church, you have permission to use homosexuals as scapegoats. At a Green Party meeting, you have permission to use capitalists as scapegoats.

Yep. Which is one of the reasons I suggested the human race unite in hating the Andromeda Galaxy. We could then be united in hatred.

When it becomes too embarrassing for people to engage in a particular kind of moral fraud, they will usually substitute a different kind of moral fraud rather than give up their feelings of moral superiority. Thus, to a first approximation, we have a principle of "Conservation of Irrationality:"

(1) much of the irrational behavior associated with religion is related to people having a craving for ego justification,

(2) changing a person's theological beliefs has little effect on his tendency to crave ego justification, and

(3) politics is the continuation of religion by other means.

Irrationality is Conserved? All the more need for a War On
Andromeda.

Andromeda (1869) Edward Poynter

Well that last bit was just an excuse for a picture of a naked lady. Art don'cha know? Besides. I'm partial to red heads. And blonds. And brunettes. And given the right circumstances even green hair. Uh. Where was I?

...it's impossible to diagnose a problem correctly if the actual cause is not a member of the approved boogieman list, and one is committed to only blaming members of the approved list (having "ideological blinders" or what Eric Raymond called "historical baggage").

Question: "Why do you keep hitting that nail when what you have to do is tighten the screw?" Answer: "I hate nails. I'd rather be hitting nails than screwing." Yep there are folks out there like that. Almost all of them in fact.

The next bit doubles down on that question and answer in spades. (Can you double down in Hearts?)

Part of the reason for the "slippery slope" phenomenon is that Progressivism is a positional good. The point of Progressivism is to distinguish oneself as being smarter than and morally superior to the average voter. One consequence of this is that Progressives have no fixed goal for the optimal size and scope of government. There is no such thing as "enough." Whatever the average voter has become acclimated to has to be "not enough" so that the Progressives can be smarter than average.

The solution for out-of-control government is not constitutional change, but psychological change. To paraphrase what Andrei Codrescue said of the USSR, what we need are not economic advisors (or constitutional lawyers), what we need are psychiatrists.

Progressives want mommy to make it nice (especially for them) and Conservatives want to find the designated miscreants and punish them. Libertarians just want to be left alone. Forgetting Trotsky: "You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you." Which is to say that in more than a few cases it is better to get them before they get you.

Different flavors of moral fraud may be equally irrational, but they are not equally harmful. By analogy, smallpox and cowpox are both diseases, but smallpox is very often fatal, whereas cowpox almost never is. Furthermore, cowpox provides immunity from smallpox, just as, to a lesser extent, I claimed above that different flavors of moral fraud (ie. various flavors associated with Christianity and Socialism) tend to compete with one another (conservation of irrationality). Mencius Moldbug describes "Revelationist" Christianity as a "counterparasite" for "Universalism" (the modern Left).

I'd rather live without parasites (dogma). But that is just me. Evidently most people can't live without them.

There is an answer:

We know enough about the sociology of religion to identify a number of key properties that a good religion should have. A successful religion will inevitably have scapegoats; ideally these scapegoats should be beyond human capacity to harm, and should also be unlikely to inflict harm on humans as a result of being vilified. Gods or god substitutes (demigods) are also pretty much unavoidable, for reasons that are outside the scope of this essay. (See Paul Bloom regarding people's cognitive biases, but also Laurence Iannaccone on the advantages to practitioners of the supernatural of having gods on whom to blame their failures. Supposedly irreligious people often project semi-divine qualities onto the State.) A low religious Herfindahl index is good for society, so it is desirable if a religion forms schisms easily or can be given features that limit its market penetration to a few percent. It is desirable for a new religion to have a cosmology that is compatible with its target audience (we need naturalistic demigods, not supernatural ones, to attract scientifically literate converts). A spectacular eschatology (ie. fire and brimstone) is also nice to have to add color and purpose. Any scientific claims that an attractive religion makes should be at least as plausible as global warming catastrophism.

Well Christianity comes pretty close so what is wrong with it?

Q. ...why don't you embrace Christianity?

A. Do you mean "embrace" in terms of me joining a Christian church, or "embrace" in terms of applauding the spread of Christianity? I am relieved to hear reports of evangelical Christianity spreading in China and Latin America. Also, as a living religion, Christianity continues to evolve, so I think it's possible that some new versions of it will make a major comeback in the first world. But as it stands, Western intellectuals have had plenty of exposure to it, and they have turned their noses up at it. And it is the rich, powerful West, where I live, that I most care about. So I do embrace Christianity in the sense of wishing there were more "skeptical enlightenment" Christians in the West, and fewer "radical enlightenment" types, but I'm not holding my breath. Also, I don't really trust Christianity in any of its many versions not to revert to its romantic roots, which historically is where much of the impetus of the American "progressive" movement came from (Jonah Goldberg documents this in Liberal Fascism, for example pp. 215-220). In other words, the Christian "cowpox" doesn't provide reliable enough immunity to the Socialist "smallpox."

Well I'm not promising Utopia. Which is where most religion goes wrong. I'm promoting war on the Andromeda Galaxy.

I have only excerpted from the exposition. The essay is both amusing and confronts a real problem at the interface between human nature and governance. Go read the whole thing. And if you have to hate: the Andromeda Galaxy is just out there waiting for your attention.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Family Values

I love discussing the wedge issues between libertarian Republicans and Christian Conservatives. Evidently it is a subject that interests Instapundit who sent me to Dana Loesch. Who is hot on the subject. Since they brought It up I'm feeling a few words coming on.

First a redefinition of sorts: Uh it is not Christians vs Libertarians. It is Statists vs Libertarians. On the Right Statists manifest mostly as Christians On the left they are Socialists. I see no value in choosing between Secular Socialists and Christian Socialists. It is rank bias of course that I do not care to rank the factions.

A commenter said:

There is no doubt that the Left Wingers would LOVE to drive a wedge between the various factions in the Tea Party movement, especially between Libertarians and Christian Conservatives.

According to my rough surveys about half the Christian "Conservatives" are really liberals. i.e. "It is not The State that is the problem. It is who is in charge. Put good Christians in charge and all will be well. And BTW the dopers deserve it. I don't care about no durn Prohibition Amendments."

And why do I call Christian "Conservatives" liberal? Because like all liberals they believe that there are a lot of things that can be fixed with a liberal application of government. They believe in the Daddy State. Liberals are more inclined to the Mommy State. Family values.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Public Stimulation

Think about all this the next time the Government subsidized $Green Jobs man comes on the telly promising a glorious future from electricity that costs 4X the price of current sources and is intermittent to boot. You down with 8 hours a day of refrigeration?

H/T Jccarlton at Talk Polywell

Expanding

Socialism = expanding the coercive sector of the economy

Republicans Have Everything Going For Them

Well at least three things. Says E.J. Dionne.

1. Flexible Platform

At the first level are the party's candidates, who can be as reasonable or as angry, as moderate or as conservative, as their circumstances require.

You mean the Republicans are not a Borg? I dunno. That sounds like a pretty good feature to me. A range of ideas and candidates get tested.

2. Lots Of Money

Next come the outside groups that refuse to disclose their donor lists. They are doing the dirty work of pounding their Democratic opponents in commercials for which no one is accountable. The Republican candidates can shrug an innocent, "Who, me?" Deniability is a wonderful thing.

This may be true. But Mr. Dionne should look up election law. The law Democrats once championed. Outside groups can't co-ordinate with candidates or parties. And as for anonymous money in campaigns? It is a tradition since the founding. Something about free speech without retaliation or something.

3. Turn Out

And then on the far right, Glenn Beck and his allies cast President Obama as the central figure in a conspiracy against America itself, fueling participation by the most extreme 10 percent or 15 percent of the electorate.

A LOT of people who normally wouldn't bother with elections are coming to this one? You betcha. And so totally unfair. Heh.

Plus. E.J. is getting smarter. Much smarter. He has figured out who is behind this nefarious plot that claims to want smaller government and lower taxes. And it is a block buster. The John Birch Society. No really. I can quote him:

Their crackpot ideas, as the historian Sean Wilentz documented in The New Yorker recently, originated in the 1950s and '60s, in the paranoid theorizing of the John Birch Society. But whereas responsible conservatives such as William F. Buckley Jr. denounced the Birchers and the rest of the lunatic fringe back then, Republicans this time are riding the radical wave. In some cases (think Sharron Angle in Nevada), the extremists are their standard-bearers.

Run for your life E.J. the lunatics who want smaller government, lower taxes, and adherence to Constitutional limits on the scope of Government (where was that drug prohibition amendment again?) are coming to gettcha.

I could let him say more but he already looks foolish enough. Instead let me turn a little attention to Tim Rutten.

Though the actual voting is still 17 days [TEA minus 15 and counting as of today. - ed] away, it seems clear that this midterm election cycle will be defined by a surprising presence and a remarkable absence.

The presence, of course, is the "tea party," and what's absent are the social issues that so bitterly divided the electorate in recent campaigns. Demography and evolving public opinion are well on the way to making an electoral dead letter of same-sex marriage, which played a pivotal role in the 2004 presidential campaign. Despite the best efforts of Democratic candidates like Barbara Boxer to rally their base around protecting access to abortion, most voters' attention is fixed firmly on their ability to feed and clothe the children they already have. The Roberts court's declaration that the 2nd Amendment confers individual rights was an unintended gift to the Democrats because it essentially took gun control off the table.

Damn. The right refuses to have a serious internal war. Oh. There is some sniping. I have engaged in it some myself. But the all out - take no prisoners - action of the past is over - for now. Reminds me of when the capitalists and communists united to defeat the Germans (Godwin prevents me from saying more). It really sucks when your enemies unite against you.

See. I have discussed the abortion question. And my opinion is that other than regulation the Federal government for sure should not be involved. That Constitution thing all us crazies want followed. So we all agree on that. That it is a States Rights issue. So that takes a lot of the fever on both sides off the table. Now personally I think any states which enacted such laws would find them unenforceable. i.e. a lot of expense for not much result, kinda like the drug laws. But that is just me. And where exactly did the Feds get drugged on such power? They needed an amendment for alcohol.

OK. Tim (he is not Tiny) is just getting warmed up. And say. This is looking like he cribbed from the same notes E.J. Dionne got. Or he (or could it be E.J.?) is a psychic. Well never mind. Maybe they just read each other.

A secondary influence on this election is the novel role of so-called third-party money, much of it secretly contributed to groups unaccountable to either party. By election day, according to a report Friday in the Wall Street Journal, such committees will have spent $300 million in support of GOP candidates. And, unlike the Republican National Committee or congressional sources, these third parties have been perfectly willing to spend on behalf of those with tea party roots. (By contrast, about $100 million in independent contributions will go to Democratic candidates; organized labor will spend an additional $200 million, but the bulk of that is going to rally union voters, whose enthusiasm has waned.)

Dang. There is a market for smaller government, lower taxes, and Constitutional limits on government power? Who knew? And the union spirit not what it used to be? Maybe they know something about the looting of their pension funds. Which, with the Democrats going out, will no longer have an open tap on the US Treasury. Dang. Screwed just like the rest of us.

Tim is looking at the candidates and is just so damn annoyed that the Republicans seem to be running a few libertarians. That has got to hurt. Especially for a man who has never heard of the Republican Liberty Caucus in the now serving Congress. Nice of you to pay such close attention Tim.

At least three candidates are such programmatic libertarians that they'd really be more at home in that party.

On Friday, the New York Times reported that its pre-election analysis has 33 tea party-backed candidates running in congressional districts that are either leaning Republican or too close to call. Eight "stand a good or better chance of winning Senate seats," the paper says.

If that's correct, the next Congress is going to contain a significant tea party caucus, and that may bring social issue tensions back to the fore.

But Tim. We have already agreed that social issues are not a job for the Federal Government. The Gordian knot of social issues has been cut on the national level. I think that means some one is going to win big or something. Maybe for a long time.

And I guess since I'm shooting fish in a barrel I might as well have a few blasts at Lorelei Kelly at the Huffington Post. And she too has it all figured out. We are a lucky country to be full of such genius.

The Tea Party has done us all a favor. It has pointed out how absent we've been in building a common narrative about modern American citizenship. Their candidates are fascinating -- like watching campaign season through beer goggles. But every time I hear one of them speak in public, I realize what an advantage the rest of us have -- real stories, real characters, real democracy.

The Tea Party is taking a joyride through the world of American ideals.

She has that right. It is more than a joy to espouse smaller government, lower taxes, and Constitutional limits on Federal power.

Loreli says this is just a fantasy.

Along the way, it has grabbed the best revolutionary symbols, the cinematic frustration of the masses, and an irreproachable sounding plan (Fiscal responsibility! Constitutionally limited government! Free markets! Yay!)

But it's all emotions and fantasy. Despite the symbolic appeal, Tea Partiers don't really speak to tradition. They speak to nostalgia. These signals resurrected from the past are not representative. They are kitsch.

Just you wait honey. America is BACK. And it is taking no prisoners (metaphorically). We have the better symbols and the better arguments. We're gonna get your children (if you have any).

Enough time for her. Nodda clue.

Peter Berkowitz writing at the Wall Street Journal diagnoses the root cause of the misunderstanding so amply illustrated above.

For the better part of two generations, the best political science departments have concentrated on equipping students with skills for performing empirical research and teaching mathematical models that purport to describe political affairs. Meanwhile, leading history departments have emphasized social history and issues of race, class and gender at the expense of constitutional history, diplomatic history and military history.

Neither professors of political science nor of history have made a priority of instructing students in the founding principles of American constitutional government. Nor have they taught about the contest between the progressive vision and the conservative vision that has characterized American politics since Woodrow Wilson (then a political scientist at Princeton) helped launch the progressive movement in the late 19th century by arguing that the Constitution had become obsolete and hindered democratic reform.

There are a fair number of us who do not think the Constitution is obsolete. And we intend to do something about it. For starters we intend to start winning elections. Starting this November 2rd.

Enough Tea Party-supported candidates are running strongly in competitive and Republican-leaning Congressional races that the movement stands a good chance of establishing a sizable caucus to push its agenda in the House and the Senate, according to a New York Times analysis.

With a little more than two weeks till Election Day, 33 Tea Party-backed candidates are in tossup races or running in House districts that are solidly or leaning Republican, and 8 stand a good or better chance of winning Senate seats.

While the numbers are relatively small, they could exert outsize influence, putting pressure on Republican leaders to carry out promises to significantly cut spending and taxes, to repeal health care legislation and financial regulations passed this year, and to phase out Social Security and Medicare in favor of personal savings accounts.

TEA minus 15 and counting MOFOs.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Got 401s?

Union pension plans in America are falling apart. Congress has a plan to fix that.

Democrats in the Senate on Thursday held a recess hearing covering a taxpayer bailout of union pensions and a plan to seize private 401(k) plans to more "fairly" distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee heard from hand-picked witnesses advocating the infamous "Guaranteed Retirement Account" (GRA) authored by Theresa Guilarducci.

In a nutshell, under the GRA system government would seize private 401(k) accounts, setting up an additional 5% mandatory payroll tax to dole out a "fair" pension to everyone using that confiscated money coupled with the mandated contributions. This would, of course, be a sister government ponzi scheme working in tandem with Social Security, the primary purpose being to give big government politicians additional taxpayer funds to raid to pay for their out-of-control spending.

The plan has been in the works for a while.

In February, the White House released its “Annual Report on the Middle Class” containing new regulations favored by Big Labor including a bailout of critically underfunded union pension plans through “retirement security” options.

The radical solution most favored by Big Labor is the seizure of private 401(k) plans for government disbursement -- which lets them off the hook for their collapsing retirement scheme. And, of course, the Obama administration is eager to accommodate their buddies.

Vice President Joe Biden floated the idea, called “Guaranteed Retirement Accounts” (GRAs), in the February “Middle Class” report.

You have to love the names they give these abominations. More correctly it would be called Guaranteed Retirement Accounts for Unions. If you are an ordinary citizen all Guarantees are off.

Here is a report from 2008 on the topic which names some more names.

GRAs would guarantee a fixed 3 percent annual rate of return, although later in her article Ghilarducci explained that participants would not “earn a 3% real return in perpetuity.” In place of tax breaks workers now receive for contributions and thus a lower tax rate, workers would receive $600 annually from the government, inflation-adjusted. For low-income workers whose annual contributions are less than $600, the government would deposit whatever amount it would take to equal the minimum $600 for all participants.

In a radio interview with Kirby Wilbur in Seattle on Oct. 27, 2008, Ghilarducci explained that her proposal doesn’t eliminate the tax breaks, rather, “I’m just rearranging the tax breaks that are available now for 401(k)s and spreading — spreading the wealth.”

What she means by "spreading the wealth" is straight up theft by the government.

Well 2008 was a good year for warnings about this stuff. Joe "The Plumber" Wurzelbacher tried to warn the 53% among us who were about to do something foolish.

Wurzelbacher said he planned to become the owner of a small plumbing business that will take in more than the $250,000 amount at which Obama plans to begin raising tax rates.

"Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?" the blue-collar worker asked.

After Obama responded that it would, Wurzelbacher continued: "I've worked hard . . . I work 10 to 12 hours a day and I'm buying this company and I'm going to continue working that way. I'm getting taxed more and more while fulfilling the American Dream."

"It's not that I want to punish your success," Obama told him. "I want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success, too.

Then, Obama explained his trickle-up theory of economics.

"My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

Well that is history now. You know what this administration is up to. No excuses this time. The only recourse short of appeal to the Gods of War is to vote the Democrats out. Every single last one of them. No exceptions.

H/T Vox Populi and I think I got the Vox link from a comment at Riehl World View. But I can't find which post right now.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

The Golden Rule Of Politics

If you want government to leave you alone you must leave others alone.

It is a hard lesson to learn. And painful. Because there is so much evil in the world. And having government guns at your side to confront it is so comforting. Until the government turns its guns on you.

Our socialist friends on the left were going to fix the economic evils of the world. And our socialist friends on the right were going to fix the cultural evils of the world. So how did it turn out? They wound up empowering each other. And so neither side is happy. So to all my socialist friends may I suggest a way out of the impasse? Give it up. Socialism that is.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Democrat - We Must Preserve Theories

Seriously. I've always suspected this but to get a lefty to say it out loud? It must be desperation time. Maybe the end of the line? One can hope. Except my friends on the right seem determined to over reach. Starting the cycle all over again.

“This isn't about President [Barack] Obama,” Rendell said on MSNBC’s “Last Word” Monday night. “It's about whether the Democratic Party, not perfect, but certainly bent on trying to preserve theories in government and progressive practices, is going to be in charge of the Congress or the Republican Party. And it's not the Republican Party of old. This is a scary Republican Party.”

Preserve theories? I guess that is all they have. Of course they could always come on over to reality and do what works instead of putting all that effort into preserving theories.

Oh yeah. Socialism. Nice theory. It doesn't work. That may be the core of Ed's angst. And his fear of the "scary Republican Party." The Republican Party is being purged of economic socialists. Now if the cultural socialists could only hold their mud. But they can't. It is not in their nature. And so socialism begets more socialism. It is no wonder the Republican Party has acquired the appellation "the stupid party". They earned it. Fair and square.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Overheard On The 'Net - 2

In the comments at Anthony Weiner Flips Out On House Floor I found some amusement:

The Democrats. Throughout American history the party of Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.

And.

...from the Plantation to the Collective, Copperhead Democrats have always been slavery's best friends.

You might also find the video at the linked site amusing. Or you might prefer to listen to music.

H/T Instapundit

Cockroach Infestation

I was reading Watts Up With That about a dispute between Christopher Monckton and John Abraham about some climate issues. But as is often the case the most interesting stuff is in the comments.

Alexander Feht says:
July 14, 2010 at 11:18 pm

I completely understand, why Christopher Monckton felt a need to make an example of a typical reprehensible representative of modern Academia. People like Christopher Monckton make me hope again that not everything is lost yet under the Moon.

And yet… I spent first half of my life battling liars and cockroaches in the former USSR. I would win against any individual liar or cockroach, no sweat. But year after year after year, I was getting more and more convinced that I didn’t want to die in this battle, overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of my enemies.

So. I live in a quiet valley now, in Colorado Rockies. Grass is green, air is fresh, sky is huge. But what is this constant swish and rustle coming from the East Coast and from the Left Coast? I know this sound well! There is no escape from the battle: cockroaches are coming.

You can read more by Mr. Feht by clicking on his name above.

As to the cockroaches: they are a self inflicted wound. Keep the place clean, limit the availability of free food, plus the occasional dose of poison and you can at least keep them in check.

So how about this for a campaign slogan:

Poison The Cockroaches In November

But perhaps that is too harsh and would be interpreted as a threat, so as an alternative:

Defeat The Cockroaches In November

See you in November.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Socialism Is The Answer

I was reading a post at Seeking Alpha about why the economy is headed further down and came across this comment:

This is a classic crisis of capitalism, an epidemic of over-production brought about by its most fundamental limitation/contradiction: the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. This tendency exerts its death-grip every 60-80 years so... it was only a matter of time.

I have two questions and an answer for the gentleman.

Let me get this straight. The problem with capitalism is that it produces too much? You would rather have the reverse problem? Socialism is your answer.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Free Book

Ed Driscoll notes that J. Neil Schulman's Alongside Night is available for free download.

“Just look at TV news or read a newspaper,” Schulman said. “Plot point after plot point is identical. In my 1979 novel I have General Motors go bankrupt — General Motors then files for bankruptcy. I have Europe issue a common currency in my novel called the ‘eurofranc’ — the European Union then goes and issues the ‘euro.’ In my novel I have a European Chancellor, based in France, accuse the U.S. President of having the monetary policies of a banana republic — then the President of the European Union — also based in France — slams U.S. plans to spend its way out of recession as ‘a road to hell’ and says President Barack Obama’s massive stimulus package and banking bailout ‘will undermine the liquidity of the global financial market.’ The copycat nature of all these plot points and dialogue” — says Schulman — “could not be more obvious!”

You can read the Amazon reviews at:

J. Neil Schulman's Alongside Night

Note: there are only about 12,000 more copies available for download. Don't wait if you want a free copy.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Beaver Nation

While reading a review of the book Making Haste from Babylon: The Mayflower Pilgrims and Their World: A New History I came across this interesting tit bit (British spelling).

Then there's the year 1620, when the Mayflower landed at Plymouth. Instead of seeing this as the first great turning point in the nation's colonial history, the date "when America began," Bunker argues that we might consider 1628 as an alternative. That was the year that colonial leaders sailed up the Kennebec River in southern Maine to establish a half-forgotten trading post at a place called Cushnoc, staking their claim as New England's primary dealers in beaver pelts. Only by investing in that highly desirable commodity did the settlers finally prove themselves to be more that mere "dabblers, clinging to their footholds along the coast." Beaver skins -- the single way "the Pilgrims could find the money to pay their debts and finance new supplies from home" -- transformed a tenuous, fragile community into something permanent.

Funny thing is that my first mate did a lot of trapping when she was growing up. We were talking about it the other day and #1 daughter was not amused. And #1 daughter is also not amused with the first mate's proficiency in firearms. I'm hoping that once she gets more real wold experience her attitude will change.

Popular history is that the Pilgrims went hungry due to bad luck.

The official story has the pilgrims boarding the Mayflower, coming to America and establishing the Plymouth colony in the winter of 1620-21. This first winter is hard, and half the colonists die. But the survivors are hard working and tenacious, and they learn new farming techniques from the Indians. The harvest of 1621 is bountiful. The Pilgrims hold a celebration, and give thanks to God. They are grateful for the wonderful new abundant land He has given them.

The official story then has the Pilgrims living more or less happily ever after, each year repeating the first Thanksgiving. Other early colonies also have hard times at first, but they soon prosper and adopt the annual tradition of giving thanks for this prosperous new land called America.

The problem with this official story is that the harvest of 1621 was not bountiful, nor were the colonists hardworking or tenacious. 1621 was a famine year and many of the colonists were lazy thieves.

In his 'History of Plymouth Plantation 1620 - 1647,' the governor of the colony, William Bradford, reported that the colonists went hungry for years, because they refused to work in the fields. They preferred instead to steal food. He says the colony was riddled with "corruption," and with "confusion and discontent." The crops were small because "much was stolen both by night and day, before it became scarce eatable.

So a society based on communal profits and theft does not work well. Where is the USSR when you need them?

But in subsequent years something changes. The harvest of 1623 was different. Suddenly, "instead of famine now God gave them plenty," Bradford wrote, "and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God." Thereafter, he wrote, "any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day." In fact, in 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists were able to begin exporting corn.

So what did work?

... in 1623 Bradford abolished socialism. He gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit. In other words, he replaced socialism with a free market, and that was the end of famines.

Many early groups of colonists set up socialist states, all with the same terrible results. At Jamestown, established in 1607, out of every shipload of settlers that arrived, less than half would survive their first twelve months in America. Most of the work was being done by only one-fifth of the men, the other four-fifths choosing to be parasites. In the winter of 1609-10, called "The Starving Time," the population fell from five-hundred to sixty.

Then the Jamestown colony was converted to a free market, and the results were every bit as dramatic as those at Plymouth. In 1614, Colony Secretary Ralph Hamor wrote that after the switch there was "plenty of food, which every man by his own industry may easily and doth procure." He said that when the socialist system had prevailed, "we reaped not so much corn from the labors of thirty men as three men have done for themselves now."

So how socialist does a country have to become before it stops working? I don't want to find out.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

What Happens When You Run Out Of Them?

It seems that the Greek socialists are not happy with their government's plan to rectify Greek finances.

About 3,000-4,000 protesters marched through central Athens, carrying banners reading "tax the rich" and "Don't take the bread from our table." Scuffles broke out when about 150 demonstrators challenged police lines near the city's central Syntagma Square, and police responded with tear gas.

Greek airports remained open, however, after air traffic controllers suspended their participation in the strike because of the travel chaos caused by Iceland's volcanic ash cloud.

Labor unions fear deeper cuts after the Socialist government began talks this week with the International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank and the European Commission for a three-year rescue package aimed at easing the country's acute debt crisis.

So what happens when you run out of rich to tax? California.

Birther State

Arizona has become a Birther State. Not full fledged so far. Only the Arizona House has passed the bill.

Even by the measure of Arizona's long history of conservatism, the past week has been extraordinary.

In the past six days, the legislature has passed the nation's strictest anti-illegal immigration bill, a law permitting concealed weapons, and the House has approved a bill requiring a presidential candidate to show his or her birth certificate to appear on the state ballot.

The last bill, which now must pass the Senate, was a clear nod to the birther movement, which claims that President Obama was not born in the US.

But is it just Arizona moving to the right? Nope. Utah seems to be shifting as well.

In a surprising development that sets the stage for a dramatic political showdown, tea party and grass-roots conservatives tell Newsmax they have seized control of Utah's GOP delegate system, and are now in a position to select which candidates will represent the party in the midterm elections.

"Our feeling is that the majority of the Republican Party delegates are now tea party people," Brian Halladay, one of the founders of the grass-roots Utah Rising organization, tells Newsmax.

Utah GOP leaders say they can't be sure, but concede the activists' assessment may be accurate.

That is definitely encouraging. But there are other folks who are not encouraged. In fact downright dismissive.

McCarthyism? Jim Crow? Segregation? Japanese internment?

Child's play. ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis says the times people are living in now will "dwarf" all those stains on America's history. And she points to the Tea Party movement -- or "bowel movement," in her words -- as a harbinger of the persecution to come.

"They are coming. And they are coming after you," the embattled head of ACORN said during a talk last month to the Young Democratic Socialists, the youth branch of the Democratic Socialists, the U.S. branch of the Socialist International.

During the address, Lewis praised the group's members for calling themselves socialists, and warned that undefined forces are plotting their doom.

"Any group that says, 'I'm young, I'm Democratic, and I'm a socialist,' is all right with me. You know that's no light thing to do -- to actually say, I'm a socialist -- because you guys know right now we are living in a time which is going to dwarf the McCarthy era. It is going to dwarf the internment during World War II. We are right now in a time that is going to dwarf the era of Jim Crow and segregation," Lewis said.

So let me see here. The Japanese were put in camps by Roosevelt and Democrat President Woodrow Wilson instituted segregation in the Federal Government. Evidently she doesn't know her history very well and hopes that her audience got an education in government schools as well.

Well history or no history - she is bothered by the Tea Parties because, and I'm sure you will be very surprised to hear this, they are not very socialist friendly.

And how about Colorado?

A Rasmussen survey released Monday paints a strange picture of Tea Party participation in Colorado. According to the report, 33% of likely Colorado voters identify themselves as participants in the Tea Party movement, compared with 24% nationally.

That is enough to swing elections. If enough of the support comes from outside Party mechanisms.

Noted liberal polling organization, Pew, looks at where America is heading and comes to a tentative conclusion.

"By almost every conceivable measure,” reads the latest Pew research poll out this week, “Americans are less positive and more critical of government these days.” Calling it a “perfect storm” of conditions that have brought about a widespread distrust of the federal government, Pew points to the bad economy, bitter partisanship, an unhappy mood among voters, and “epic discontent” with Congress and elected officials.

I didn’t need Pew to tell me that fiscal conservatism is becoming more popular than either political party. When I ask folks I meet what their political outlook is, very few say “Republican” or “Democrat.” Almost everyone now starts by saying they’re a fiscal conservative, then places themselves on the spectrum of social issues from conservative to liberal. I have yet to hear anyone say, “Well, I’m a fiscal liberal ...”

That’s because no one outside of the White House and the speaker’s office thinks government spending is the answer--to problems in the healthcare system, to the environment, and to some degree, to the problem of failing schools.

It looks like the socialists of ACORN may very well be the ones being flushed this November. Which would make her recent comments projection and good news for the Tea Party.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

A History Lesson

I had something to say about all this yesterday. F. A. Hayek had something to say about it in 1944:

The Road to Serfdom

H/T Diogenes via e-mail

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Voting For Socialism

If the audio wasn't exactly clear this should make it plainer:

Reverend Al Sharpton told Fox News: “I think that this began the transforming of the country where the President had promised. This is what he ran on.” When the interviewer interjected that many view the vote as a step towards socialism, Sharpton didn’t skip a beat, responding:

the American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama.

Well it looks like vote or no vote we are going to get it good and hard.



Short version:

The variant of socialism where the government doesn’t nationalize the means of production but controls it through law and regulation is called fascism.

H/T The Foundry

Cross Posted at Classical Values