Liars Must Be Punished

I won’t link to the disgusting New York Times article in question, but I saw it: the gist of the story is that three years ago, a mix-race high school kid saw a white girl say “the N word” and he recorded her doing it. From what I understand, the girl was singing a rap song which uses the word. So, anyways, this other kid records her saying it and then, three years later, he posts it on line after he finds out what college the girl got accepted to. He deliberately held on to it – waiting for the moment when it would do the most damage. And then he dropped it on her and, presto!, it worked just like he planned…the girl was forced to withdraw from the school and is now socially ruined. Tagged forever as a “racist” person…even though all she ever did was say words of a song (a bad song, to be sure: but this is the sort of music the kids are told they have to listen to if they want to be cool).

Now, you and I know what really happened here: the boy who recorded the video was probably shut down by the girl and this was his revenge. The way the story is being cast is that he’s a hero for finally forcing the girl to confront her racism…and the legacy of racism in the United States. But the real point of the effort by the NY Times, however, is to use a lie (“the girl is a racist and part of racist AmeriKKKa”) to enforce terror…fear that you may have an unguarded moment where you utter something unapproved and it will be used to destroy you, later. So, better make sure you are either strictly silent, or always braying along with whatever the SJW’s are on about at the moment.

The chances of an upper middle class suburban white girl being a racist in 21st century America are about nil. She’s been taught since kindergarten to not be racist. Her parents were taught the same when they were in school. Everything about her life is from the liberal script about what education should be. In fact, she’s been taught that she’ll get massive social credit for being non-racist and dating non-white boys (she’d get more for being lesbian or gender fluid, of course). The whole thrust of American popular culture and education is to teach her that non-white people are the best and she must love and respect them no matter what. The point here is that there is zero chance her use of “the N word” was meant as a racial attack in any way, shape or form. She ain’t Bull Connor and this isn’t 1963. The whole thing about America being racist and that we have to confront it with censorship and reparations and such is merely a gigantic lie – but a necessary lie if you want to control the debate. If, that is, you want to control people.

And that’s what the Times story is about – as are all other stories like this and all the bogus racial attacks and all the George Floyd protests and Black Lives Matter and the whole run of all the SJW Thought Police things you see – to place you under control. To forbid you to say certain things in public. If they can get your fired and/or socially ruined because of something you said, then you are going to be very careful abou what you say. You will knuckle under to tyranny because to speak out against it will get a SJW mob after you costing you friends and employment. And it is the MSM which drives this – some dimwit posting something on Tik Tok only matters if the matter is taken up. In other words, it only matters if the MSM reports about it. And, of course, they do: it doesn’t matter how absurd it is, if it can be presented as someone being racist, they’ll run with it.

The Left wants total control. They see it necessary on two levels:

  1. They believe themselves morally superior.
  2. They believe our lives depend on the Left being in charge.

They have learned that they can’t actually secure what they want in a free and democratic society – but, remember, they are morally superior and our lives depend on their rule. Morally superior people who are saving the world can’t compromise with morally inferior people who are trying to destroy the world (these morally inferior world destroyers are you and me, by the way). I mean, if you really believed like they do, how could you compromise? Of course you wouldn’t – so, by hook or crook, you take power. And it is made a lot easier if certain things simply can’t be said. If the Left believes that Reparations are necessary, then they are necessary and there’s an end on it…they can’t bother fussing about with your ridiculous objection that Barack Obama owes Reparations to Thomas Sowell if Reparations are to be done. So, easier to just call objections to Reparations racism and call it a day…and then go and ruin a few people over it so that everyone else gets the message.

And, as usual, the MSM is the vehicle. It gets said and then repeated and then the MSM picks up on it and then the person is ruined and everyone else takes note and then takes on protective coloring to protect themselves. Lies are being used to terrorize people into silence so that they no longer have rights to the public square.

I don’t know about you, but I’ve got a feeling that when the Founders wrote the First Amendment – and when my dad fought for it on Saipan – they didn’t have in mind protecting the ability of egregious liars to use slander to silence political dissent. In fact, I’m pretty sure they and he meant the exact opposite of that. What I’m saying here – and this will probably infuriate some – if we were to punish the New York Times for this slander, it wouldn’t be a violation of the First Amendment (in an added bit of sickness, the Times hides behind the 1A which they believe was crafted by White Supremacists).

But Mark (you object), we can’t control the Press! It is a slippery slope! Where does it lead? Well, it probably leads to what amounts to a State controlled media slandering people so that one Party can obtain and retain power. Hate to break it to ya, guys, but we’re at the bottom of the slippery slope. We slipped down it ages ago. And we won’t start to climb back up as long as we vigorously defend the ability of the MSM to lie about us. They have to be forced to stop lying.

It is either that or we might as well hang it up and start memorizing the 57 genders. We can’t win if we can be lied about with impunity. It is as simple as that. Look what they did to Trump? Think about how much more he would have got done if more than half his time wasn’t spent merely fighting against lies? Trump pointed out early on that we needed to reform libel laws. He was attacked for saying it…but he was right! We must reform libel laws. We must punish for lies. And severely. We must make it so that it isn’t you and I thinking twice about saying the truth, but the MSM thinking ten times before publishing something…because it better be true or it’ll cost ya.

Punish liars or be ruled by liars. Those are the choices.

Fighting for America

But, now we might have to become the people in the way. Scott Adams (the Dilbert guy) noted on Twitter the other day that if our side doesn’t take control of the streets for 2024, it could get ugly for us. I feel certain that the reason the Courts have shot down Trump’s efforts (usually without even looking at the evidence) is because they are afraid if not anti-Trump. Everyone knows that the Left would explode in violence nationwide if Trump were to prevail. We might have to bring things to a point where refusing to uphold the law is more frightening that ignoring it.

For us older folks, another thing that has to be done is to fully realize that the America we grew up in is gone and it isn’t coming back. Not like it was. We can still maintain a Republic where rights are secured and the Rule of Law reigns…but it won’t be the old America we grew up in. As for our father’s and grandfather’s America: that might as well be a foreign land. To secure our rights – to be able to at least be what we want – some very hard and fast choices will have to be made.

  1. Some of the people on our side are going to say and do things which even to us seem outrageous. Ignore it. Let our enemies attack; we don’t attack our own. Yesterday, Kim Klacik (you might remember her run for Congress in Baltimore) made some outrageous statements on Twitter about the ethnic Chinese spouses of some prominent Americans. Lots of people dogpiled on her. I didn’t. Why not? Because we’ve yet to see a Democrat take exception to what Omar says and does. Learn the lesson: the Democrats never attack their own. At most, when really pressed by some extreme action, they’ll issue a mild rebuke. But there is no rejection – there is no Buckleyite purge of the Birchers (which was a huge mistake). If they fight for liberty, I simply don’t care if they also do some crazy things.
  2. The young – I’m talking 30 and younger – don’t even know what the Constitution says and they don’t care. I recall during the Impeachment process a young lady at work was all excited when the House impeached Trump. She was sure it meant Trump was gone: it took an immigrant who recently became an American to explain to her that impeachment was a mere indictment, not a trial or conviction. This was an American woman fully in possession her faculties and a graduate of High School…and she was unaware of the basic laws under which she is governed. We need youth votes to win – we won’t win them by citing Madison. We have to find out what these mostly ignorant but nice and generally fair-minded kids want and then give that to them in return for their votes.
  3. The productive people are the core of our coalition. If they make, mine or grow things, we must do whatever we can to make life better and easier for them. This is over and above any purely economic or fiscal considerations. The men and women who break a sweat to make a living are those whom we must seek out, listen to and act in favor of. Reaganism and Supply-Side economics are no longer key here: making sure Jose in El Paso can keep his construction job is…even if it means we spend or tax more than Reagan ever would.
  4. No more wars. We’re done with that. We’re America First. Fortress America. If we ever go to war again, it is total war using every aspect of our military might to completely destroy the enemy. Let the Democrats curry favor with defense contractors: we’re done with them.
  5. Back the Blue becomes conditional. If the Blue is taking orders from petty tyrants to enforce ridiculous laws and mandates, then our support is withdrawn. The Blue must learn that they are extensions of us, not the city council. Their job is to protect the people, which includes protecting people in the exercise of their rights. And Back the Blue does not extend to prosecutors offices.
  6. Corporate America is our enemy. The upper reaches of corporate America are staffed with the same sort of people who staff the upper reaches of government America. They are liberals to the core and they despise us. They will make decisions which harm their bottom line if it will offer some insult to regular Americans. Our task is to bring the to heel by whatever means prove necessary.

You can probably come up with your own but what can easily be seen is the old GOP Conservatism which prevailed in our politics from the 60’s until W is over and done with. It doesn’t work. It didn’t stop the Left. Now, we only hope we can secure our ability to speak our mind in public and hold on to our property. And we’ll only be able to do that – and at least start reforms which might restore old America in a century – if we secure power for quite a long time…and to do that we’re going to have to welcome as friends some people we don’t like and go along with some policies we know are wrong.

Trump was never going to be enough. If he gets a 2nd term, it won’t be enough. We need twenty years of uninterrupted power. We need to steel ourselves to arrest and dispossess large numbers of people that we used to view as our allies. Your ability to say that two plus two equals four is on the line. The rest of it becomes rather trivial. If you would not live in an America where you are forced to publicly lie in order to live, then get into this fight and leave aside your quiet dogmas of the past.

Ban the Lies or America Dies

How can we survive without the truth? That is the central question and problem of our times.

As President Trump continues his efforts to stop the steal, the thing that shines out most glaringly is how many lies are generated, so fast and so brazenly. It really is astonishing: plenty of people have unearthed the direct quotes of people who in 2019 – you know, last year – were saying that the Russians hacked the 2016 election and flipped votes from Hillary to Trump who are now saying Trump’s efforts are an affront to Democracy as there is simply no way – at all – that anyone committed fraud in 2020. What set me off this morning was a Blue Check journalist talking about how she and her cohorts in “reality based journalism” must fight tooth and nail against Trump’s lies about 2020 fraud. This goes beyond lack of self awareness and flips right on in to flat out liar.

Another thing which set me off was a journalist (the usual Blue Check, CNN contributor sort) who, in response to the federal execution of an inmate, decided to point out that the jury which convicted the man was all white. I won’t link to the story of the man who was executed – the less said about him, the better – you can look it up. If you do, the first thing you’ll think after reading the particulars of the case is that an all black jury would have fried him as well. The journalist put up a picture of the convict at his most smiling and harmless looking; to build up in your mind sympathy for this poor, black man killed by Trump’s racist AmeriKKKa. In other words, just another pack of lies which the guy knew was a pack of lies when he uttered it…but he’s gonna keep on working for CNN.

On and on it goes like that – lies and then contradictory lies said by the same people without shame. How are we supposed to even function? How can we make any sort of rational policy choices if every issue is hedged in by lies?

For the first time, I really understand why our ancestors burned heretics at the stake. We look back upon it in horror because we believe that the free exchange of ideas – any ideas – is inherently good. Well, not so sure about that any longer. What the Inquisitors were trying to do was not increase cruelty but to protect a society which was built upon certain dogmas asserted to be true in all cases. We now live in a society where the dogmas which built it now have to compete with complete fabrications. How’s that working out for us?

The American Dogma, as it were, is that we are created equal with an inherent right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. None of these assertions are capable of proof. They are dogmas as unprovable as the doctrine of the Trinity. We asserted them as self-evident Truth and then proceeded to create a set of laws based upon the assertions. All of our rights are based on our asserted truths – none of them have any force if any of the assertions are untrue. And over the past century we have allowed people to exist in the United States who say these assertions are not self-evident truths. We have allowed heretics to convert us. That is, we allowed liars to dispute what we hold as self evidently true. We may as well have provided a seat at the table for people who hold that the Earth is flat.

Those who lie should not have a place at the table. It cannot be. If it is allowed, then the liars will triumph over us. The guy who says there isn’t an inherent right to life – and so abortion and euthanasia are good – is the same guy who will also assert there are 57 genders and that white people are inherently racist and so on. Lies cannot coexist with Truth. Either it becomes all lies, or all truth. They are very exclusive clubs. And if we are to survive – not as America, but as merely civilized human beings – then we are going to have to ban lies. We are going to have to find the courage to say, at long last, “no”.

We can start with something simple: a ban on the propagation of Nazi and Marxist ideology. But we must start, and all the lies must be forced out. Yes, this will take amendment to the Constitution (or revolution; or both) but it is a necessity. The Liberal idea that all ideas must compete has proven itself to be wrong: all that does is allow the worst ideas to gain traction: mostly because they offer easy profit to those who subscribe to them and allow those who envy to dress up their sin as a quest for justice. It all has to go.

Many, I know, will recoil from this. It is so outside our experience. But you can’t win an argument with a liar: he’ll just come up with a new lie as soon as you dispose of his first. Liars are like that, you see? Only by saying to the liar, “you may not speak your lie”, can you stop him.

The bottom line is that any idea which contests with our self-evident truths has to go. If an idea can’t be reconciled with our being Created Equal and having a Creator; with our having an inherent right to life, to liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then it must be banned in the United States. The law gets enacted and then if anyone is charged with propagating ideas contrary to our dogmas, we leave it up to a jury to decide if that is the case. But the ideas which are contrary must be banned. Not allowed. Forbidden. Not in our schools and libraries; not in our movies and TV shows. Gone. Out. Only mentioned, if at all, to point out how they are laughably false because they contradict what we know to be self-evidently true.

Tolerance brought us to the point where a man will keep his MSM job even if he directly contradicts what he said before. So, let’s have a little bit of intolerance until we can at least expect a man to say the same thing, twice.

Pondering the Conservative Future

As of this moment, Campaign 2020 is still up in the air and while we all hope and pray that Trump prevails over the Fraud, we still need to take a thought to the future regardless of how the campaign ends.

Trump did do some rather phenomenal things on Tuesday – increased his vote from 2016 by around 5 million votes, increased GOP numbers in the House and almost certainly held the Senate in a year when the map was unfavorable to the GOP. A lot of Trump’s message, then, resonated with the American people. If Biden gets in, it is with the most pathetic mandate in modern history – and a GOP Senate means no grand plans get enacted, at all. On the other hand, Biden is north of 70 million votes.

That’s a lot.

And while we don’t care about the national popular vote – because there isn’t such a thing – it does indicate that Trump was rejected by a very large segment of the American population. And we GOPers/Conservatives can’t forever assume we’ll get EC wins. We need to become more popular.

Over the years I’ve talked a lot about how things need to be looked at afresh: that the quiet dogmas of the past are not suited to the present moment. I believe that now this is just more true than ever. Unless we find it within ourselves to navigate ourselves to long-term power, we will eventually end up losing everything. Keeping the Senate means no packed Court and no Statehood for DC – but there will come a day when the entire government is in Democrat hands, and then all that will be done. The Left never forgets and never retreats: once they stake out a position, it becomes unalterable dogma, and it will be done, if they ever have the power to do so.

I think our first step is to state our ideals and rank them in order of importance. We need to know what we stand for, what is most important of what we stand for – and then decide what we’ll give up to keep what we think is most important. For me, it goes like this:

  1. The right to bear arms
  2. Freedom of conscience
  3. Freedom of association
  4. Property rights

Others may come up with different, or place them in different order. But my view is that if I have those four things, I am free and so content. I will put up with anything, as long as I have those four things. If I can defend myself, say what I wish, associate with whom I wish and own my property, I’ve got nothing to complain about. No level of taxation or regulation (as long as they aren’t designed to impinge upon the four) will bother me that much.

So, what next? Well, now I decide what I am willing to give in on in order to get a deal which secures the four. What I will write now is not definitive: merely examples of how such a thing might go.

Want single payer health care? Then let’s couple it with a law which says that after 20 years, a person’s primary residence is freed from all taxation.

Want Universal Basic Income? Then enact a law which prohibits employment discrimination based on viewpoint: that I can say whatever I want and associate with whomever I want outside the work environment and I can’t be fired for it.

Want free education? Sure: as long as it also includes trade schools and has an ironclad guarantee against viewpoint discrimination on campus.

See what I’m driving at? You and I know that single payer healthcare and UBI are drivel…but the bottom line is that a huge portion of our population wants Uncle Sugar to take care of them…and if we don’t do it, then the Left eventually wins and we get it, without getting any assurances for the things we care most about.

But the really crucial thing here is that by bending on some of these things, it will allow us to speak to the mindless Care Bears of the Suburbs and convince them that, hey, we care, too: so vote for us! Once we get the power, we give them their security blankie…while we keep the guns. It is, as far as I can tell, the only way forward for us in a United States of America. The only other path which doesn’t wind up with you and I in the Happy Fun Fuzzy Bunny Re-Education Camp is a national divorce – which I’m also willing to entertain.

Our Primary Duty is to Truth, Not Theory

A little comic strip was put out (see it here) and the premise is that we gun-totting red-neck morons are hypocrites because we’re not using our guns to stop the Feds from arresting Antifa (though the cartoonist cleverly uses a “mom” as the person being taken away by Drumpf’s Gestapo, rather than a molotov-throwing fanatic). My response to this was:

Remind me again why I’m supposed to defend people who think I’m inherently racist.

And this is even supposing the police are Gestapo and it was an innocent mom being rounded up. But, of course, it isn’t Gestapo and it isn’t moms. It is regular, clearly identified federal officers arresting people in the process of committing federal crimes (like one idiot who was ID’d as an arsonists because he had his name tattooed on his back). None of us feel the 2A gives us the right to shoot at police officers in the performance of their normal duties. 2A, as you and I know, is only if the police try to enforce unconstitutional laws. Like, say, a law (the Left wants) making “misgendering” someone a hate crime.

But getting to the point I made: why should I defend my enemies? I know the True Conservative/Libertarian premise has been that we must defend our enemies in order to prove we are in favor of freedom. I used to believe that. Trust me: 20 years ago, I’d have gone to the mat to defend the proposition that I had to protect a Commie’s right to speak.

I have revised my views.

Communists, Nazis and Fascists definitely have some things in common. One of them is a firm desire to suppress any ideas which aren’t their own. Another commonality is that they will all use a liberal, democratic system to advance themselves into power and once they have the power, they then use it to make sure no one can ever get rid of them. In the Trio of Totalitarianism, regardless of what the three may kill each other over, the unified front is that only the Totalitarians get to have power and everyone else gets suppressed (often very brutally and unto death).

This is the truth. There is no way around it: and the Truth shall not be forced to give ground to lies. That is what our real problem is – all up and down in our society. In an effort to be fair, we conceded that disgusting lies have a place alongside the most beautiful truth. We have to stop that. Lies are wrong and bad and have no place in a civilized nation. In theory, of course: free expression of ideas. In practice, we can’t allow lying ideas to be expressed without let or hindrance.

But Mark, you say, who gets to define it? Well, we do. You know: you and me and that guy down the street. It was only a Libertarian pinhead and a liberal judge who decided we have to let lying Commies walk around free in the USA. Make a law – even if it requires an amendment – saying that the propagation of Totalitarian ideologies is illegal in the USA. Then let the Commies and Nazis and Fascists try to prove their ideology isn’t that…love to hear a Commie explain that he’s totes ok with people retaining private property after the Revolution…and then show him in his own damned book that he is not ok with it. But the main thing is that we’ll no longer be saying “see, we let you spout your evil lies, we’re in favor of freedom!”. Instead, we’ll be saying, “your lies are vile; convince me they aren’t or stop saying them.” It is a whole world of difference.

If you wonder why things are so screwed up in the USA, look no further than the fact that we have allowed a host of lies to walk free. If you wonder why doors are locked; kids are fat and on psychological medicine; bums are defecating on the streets; purple haired weirdos are given power… it is all because we allowed liars to lie with impunity. We said – how stupidly! – that if we didn’t allow the liars to lie, then we’d have no chance to speak the truth! What happened is that the cacophony of lies drowned out the truth…until, now, telling the truth in public may get you fired, arrested or at least hounded out of public life.

Our primary loyalty must be to the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And if reaffirming truth requires some quite brutal actions (it almost certainly will), then that is what we’ll have to do. It is either demand adherence to truth, or live in nothing but lies. It is our choice.

Stop Reacting. Start Thinking.

Earlier today, I got myself into trouble on Twitter: I had suggested that we shouldn’t immediately dismiss an idea because it conforms in some to what BLM might want. I got a pretty consistent explosion of outrage directed my way. And, I understand it and am sympathetic to it. But it was difficult to try and explain myself in a series of Tweets…so, here is a larger exposition of my ideas.

Our opponents aren’t a rag-tag bunch of Bolshevik wannabees: they are a well-funded and tightly organized Ruling Class which is determined to have its way. The rag-tag rioters out there shouting to kill the police and such are just the bought and paid for operatives of this Ruling Class. And the key is that the rioters don’t know it.

Some of them don’t know, simply: in other words, they are just ignorant fools following along with whatever seems cool at the moment. But others have a level of sincerity against injustice and simply think they are fighting the Establishment when what they are doing is the Establishment’s bidding. You’ll note how quickly “Defund the Police” got discarded…and even when it has advanced a bit, as in Minneapolis, the big shots are merely hiring private security details (on the taxpayer dime, of course). The target of the mob is, what? It is Trump. It is religion. It is you and me. It isn’t Nike and Hollywood. It isn’t Pelosi. It isn’t Yale’s gigantic endowment. It isn’t the actual system of control: the government bureaucracies; the intelligence agencies; the megacorporations; popular culture manufacturers.

My idea is that there is, indeed, a great deal of injustice out there – and a great deal of this is visited on the poorest Americans, who are disproportionately minority. I’ve talked about this before: poor people simply ground up in a legal system they can’t navigate their way out of. Some times, of course, because they are incompetent…but some times simply because once you get caught in it, there’s no way out unless you have a bucket of money. From the perspective of such a person, it seems at times like things are stacked against them…and then they see us, on our side, backing the blue…the same blue which the Establishment set up and which goes lightly where it can get burned (ie, rich and middle class neighborhoods) and drops like a hammer where it can (ie, poor neighborhoods). It can seem to such a person that you and I are the problem…that we set this up.

We know we didn’t. We back the blue not because we’re bastards, but because we know that law is a must. But even our side has been a little blind here: what if the laws, themselves, are insane? Shouldn’t the blue we back have gone, at some point, and said “I won’t enforce this insane law. Fire me if you want, but I became a cop to make sure justice and peace prevail.” Never a peep like that – and, finally, we got our taste of it with the lockdowns: we were finally the people being targeted for the enforcement of insane decrees of government. And the ground shifted and we were prepared for deep reforms of the police…which also entailed a willingness for deep reforms of all government and how it interacts with the people. Hey, presto!, riots…and we’re all back to “back the blue” and lets crack some heads. We’re forgetting that the same people who sent the cops out to arrest kids in a playground also let the rioters run wild…and in both the arresting of kids and the allowing of riots the police did as they were told.

How about we stop being suckers, at least for a bit?

We really have to start thinking and stop reacting. The riots do need to stop. The police do need to enforce the laws. But the laws have to be sane – and we can’t get sane laws until we get power and we won’t get power until the overwhelming mass of the people swing in line behind us. 51% won’t do it. That’ll just lead to our eventual political defeat or civil war…or both. We need 60 and 65%. We need to convince huge masses of people who ostensibly hate us to come over to us. This means we must talk to them – and talk to them about what they think is important. And do things they would like to have done. Not the Bolshevik stuff (the Establishment tolerates the odd Bolshy in the realms of power…but keeps them on a leash: eg, Bernie). But stuff like reforming the police. Instituting neighborhood militia for routine patrols. Pouring in buckets of money confiscated from liberal moneybags (Yale’s endowment would be a good place to start).

It comes down to this: what are you trying to conserve? A theory, or a civilization? The institutions are corrupt to the bone. Our Ruling Class is un-American and merely interested in keeping its wealth and privilege; and to do so it feels it must destroy family, property and religion. I think it is time we thought anew and acted anew…that we cease to fall into the categories the Ruling Class has provided for us and start to reach out to all. Some will spit on us. That’s ok. But some will come over if we show that we want justice…and if we show them who their real enemies are.

Back the Blue?

We’ve all done that – almost reflexively taking the side of the police when they get into a dispute about an action. And, truth be told, very often it turns out the cop either acted correctly or had extenuating circumstances. But, not always. We have come across those cases where the officer was clearly in the wrong – and to our credit, we didn’t try to defend the indefensible. We’re not, after all, #MeToo Liberals urging a vote for Joe “Fingers” Biden. But I also think that we got a little too far in defending the police.

Over the past few days, I think we’ve all seen police officers using ridiculous actions to enforce closures and social distancing. I think the most egregious example is a Texas SWAT team (a rather chubby SWAT team, now dubbed “Meal Team Six” on social media) shutting down a bar which had opened in defiance of Coronavirus orders. But that is just one of scores – and it is starting to break into the Conservative mind that these police officers are “just obeying orders”…but insane, anti-human and likely unconstitutional orders. And if they’ll do that now, when won’t they do it?

It has been a rule since 1945 that obedience to orders is not exculpatory. The Nazis tried to get themselves off the hook by claiming they were just following orders but the ruling has been – and it is correct – that no human being is obligated to obey obviously illegal orders. Our police don’t seem to have that institutional belief: they appear to be willing to obey any order from on high…and this is disturbing us on the Right because we always assumed that most law enforcement people are, well, part of us. That when faced with an order to arrest us for political dissent, they’d refuse. Now we know different – when faced with a choice between enforcing an unconstitutional order and risking their pension, they’ll enforce the unconstitutional order.

This is just writing large what we’ve seen out of the FBI for the past few years. Even President Trump still couches his criticism of the FBI in terms of “most of the agents are good people”…just a few bad apples, right? But if they are good agents, why haven’t they come forward to inform on the bad apples? Right – doing so risks their career. And this makes them not good…in fact, it makes them bad; as bad as the actual bad actors. After all, Eichmann merely scheduled the trains…it took tens of thousands of German railway employees to actually get the trains from point A to point B.

Readers here know I’ve long been in favor of major reforms of the police and the abolition of the FBI…but now I think there is an urgency which was previously lacking. Those charged with enforcing the laws of the United States are showing themselves to be enemies of freedom. That their corporate identity (and fat pensions) are their biggest concern…and if that means they have to throw innocent people in jail, so be it.

On the whole, “back the blue” still makes sense – the police do a job most of us can’t and they deal with the seamy underside of civilization. But if we are to back the blue, then the blue had better be worth backing. They had better, that is, be dedicated to truth and justice above all. And it is we, the people, who will have to make sure that those we have delegated to enforces laws to are worthy of our trust.

Destroying the Global Order

Some Never Trump “Conservative” wrote a whine about how Trump is destroying the global order which was founded by FDR and sustained by all President’s through Obama. To which I responded: good. The global order established in the wake of WWII was grossly immoral and essentially made the United States the whipping boy of the world – we were to pour out our blood and treasure to please everyone but ourselves.

I used to sign on to that, though when I did I didn’t put it that way. Now, I don’t sign on to it…because I’ve looked at the results and I’ve changed my views.

Think about what this global order has done:

1. Didn’t force Russia to disgorge central Europe after WWII. We could have. We had nukes, they didn’t. But even absent that, we had the vastly more powerful military force.

2. Allowed the beastly Communists to win in China. How’s that worked out for us, long term?

3. Refused to fight for victory in Korea.

5. Forced the European powers to give up their global role – and then we whined for decades about how they weren’t taking on a global role.

6. Sided with savages against Civilization in Suez.

7. Stood aside while one Third World brute after another seized his nation, looted his treasury and massacred his population.

8. Made it official policy that we wouldn’t fight the USSR unless it was a gigantic nuclear massacre of both our populations.

9. Vietnam.

10. De-industrialization of the United States.

11. Importing, lauding and often funding amoral nincompoops who were at war with the moral values that made America the greatest nation in human history.

12. Placing our own poor on welfare while we shipped out their jobs to even cheaper labor overseas.

13. Staying in a UN which is a mockery of human decency.

14. Allowed our Universities to be captured by bigoted Communist zealots.

On and on I can go. You can’t name one thing good this global order has accomplished. Its all been a disgusting descent into a nightmare world of high-tech barbarism. I want nothing more to do with it. I want us to get rid of it by the quickest means available. Thank God for President Trump – intentionally or not, he’s ripped the lid off the nauseating stew and now we can see it for what it is.

Rebuild the West

Papa_George

What is the West? Been hearing a lot lately from Establishment types – especially Never Trumpers – about how Trump is destroying the West. I opined back at one of the nitwits that if his idea of the West is what we’ve got to save, then I want it to die.

That picture above is my Grandfather. George Childs Noonan, Sr. Born in 1896. Went to war – along with his seven brothers – in World War One. Because his country asked him to. And there was no way his country would ask him to fight except in a good cause and to do good for the world. Unlike about 115,000 of his comrades, he came home. So, too, did all of his brothers; though all had been wounded in the war to one degree or another (the family joke is this is why we’ve had nothing but bad luck…grandpa and his brothers used up the family allotment). My grandfather would be 123 and it is odd that a 55 year old man has a grandfather that old…but he married a little later than usual for men of his generation (1926; he was nearly 30 when he got hitched) and his son, my father, was even later to the marriage game (31 when he married my mom); so, this means a guy born in the 60’s has a grandpa born in the 19th century when most people my age have grandfathers born in the 1910’s and 20’s.

Because of the enormous age gap, I never really got to know my grandfather well. By the time I came along, he was pushing 70…and my earliest memories of him are when he was well past 75. He died in 1981 at 85 years old. Most of what I know I got second hand from my father, plus a bit from a fascinating bit of autobiography he tried in the 1960’s. The man clearly was a character. It was muted by the time I remember him, but in his day he was the life of the party. He knew all sorts of interesting people and tried all sorts of interesting things to make a living.

He was honest and he imparted that to his son, who gave it to his son: DO NOT LIE. I remember one time as a boy I broke that rule and lied directly to my grandmother and though it happened more than 40 years ago and she’s more than 30 years in her grave, I still feel a deep and abiding shame over it. Better to be a bank robber than be a liar. Speak the truth, or don’t speak at all. Keep the secrets: just because you found out something this doesn’t make it right for you to blab about it to every Tom, Dick and Harry out there. Be generous: it is better to have 10% of something than 100% of nothing. Treat everyone with respect – doesn’t matter if they are the sleaziest bum on the street, it won’t cost you to call him “sir” and treat him decently. Work hard. Don’t expect charity. Keep to your own business and only want what you earn. These are the lessons which were transmitted…and though they become attenuated in this modern age of clatter and buzz, gape and gloat, they still come home to me.

That was the West. That was what was worth preserving. That is what we lost – and its been replaced by something else, something I don’t like one bit. It might still fly the same banners and speak the same words, but it isn’t the same thing. We’re expected to lie – in fact, it is demanded that we lie. We’re supposed to envy anyone who has aught that we don’t have, and demand they give it over to us. We’re to treat people with contempt. We’ll send our young men and women off to murky wars with no clear idea of what is to come of it…and then do dirty, backroom deals with cretins that we’re supposed to be fighting.

No more of that for me: what I fight for is what my grandfather actually, in the flesh and with his blood, fought for. A West of truth, of decency, of hard work, of self reliance. What he shipped off to fight for in 1917 is long gone, but I now see my duty: to bring it back.

How Far Do We Let the Left Go?

The District Attorney of San Francisco – huge Commie rat – has decided that public urination will no longer be a crime. One fine person made the correct suggestion: someone should go piss on the DA’s car. But once that excellent and patriotic action is completed, what then? Well, it got me thinking (I know, dangerous!) and then I recalled Article 4, section 4 of the United States Constitution:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government…

A Republican form of government is not just a bunch of voting going on. No; not at all. A Republic is a thing of dogmas and rules – and it only works if all the rules are enforced to the best of everyone’s ability. And one of the rules of a Republic is that laws cannot be set aside – but that is just what the DA is doing. In my view, per the Constitution, Trump could give the DA 24 hours to reverse himself and, if he refuses, send in US Marshals to enforce laws against public urination. A bit extreme? Sure – but extreme times do call for extreme measures.

It is best to step back a bit and think about what we’re dealing with here and the first step in that is to ask just why anyone would do anything which would allow or encourage people to piss on the streets? The answer lies in the DA – Chesa Boudin. If that surname seems familiar, it is because it is: he’s the son of Kathy Boudin, the psychotic Commie murderer. Which means that Chesa is both the son and grandson of hard core Communists. When his ma got arrested shortly after his birth he ended up being raised by Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. He worked as a translator for the Commie dictator of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez. He’s a true believer, folks; he’s Communist to the core. And that means he believes – completely – that all of the social pathologies in society are the direct result of Capitalism…and that once Socialism is in place, all of these pathologies will disappear. No, seriously: this is what Commies believe. Look it up if you don’t believe me.

The reason why a Commie doesn’t want to enforce laws against public urination is not because he likes to smell piss on the streets: it is because he’s sure that the man pisses on the streets because the Capitalist system made him that way, and no real Commie is going to do anything to prop up the Capitalist system. What the DA is doing is essentially saying, “see, you Capitalist bastards! This is what you created!”; and he’ll then go on to propose Communism as the cure; though given he’s an American Commie and has learned from the experiences of his parents and grandparents, he’s not going to flat out say that…he’ll call it being Progressive and working against the criminalization of being homeless.

Any enforcement of any law regarding property or public decency or such is seen by a Communist as a mere propping up of the Capitalist system, because all such laws were created by Capitalists for the sole purpose of retaining power. They aren’t about public safety or justice or anything such thing. Capitalists are inherently incapable of doing anything good – all the laws are merely enforcement of Capitalist supremacy (though today’s Commies will more usually say they are about supporting White Supremacy – which is just a substitute phrase for the Class Enemy; you know, Capitalists). A true believer like Chesa Boudin simply will not enforce any laws – which means most of them – which he, as a Commie, considers to be laws enacted by Capitalists to suppress the people (whom he is the Vanguard for, being that he’s a conscious revolutionary Communist, dig?). At the end of the day, electing Chesa Boudin as DA was an act against the existence of a democratic Republic…there is a good chance that even most San Francisco voters didn’t realize this but it still remains that a person is in the DA’s office who is opposed to the whole idea of a Constitutional order (remember: all of that Constitutional order was merely created to protect the power and wealth of Capitalists/White Supremacists/Homophobes/Insert-Hated-Group-Here). He is, in short, opposed to a Republican form of government. And, so, must be stopped.

Right now a whole bunch of my fellow Conservatives are going to start going, “hold on there, sparky: what about federalism and local self rule? You call yourself a Distributist and that means you say you believe in Subsidiarity (thing should be done on the lowest level possible); you some kind of hypocrite?”. I don’t think so – no more than the Founders were. They placed in the Constitution very strong protections for States and individuals…but they also did include the above quoted bit, and also permitted the federal government to suspend the writ of habeas corpus. And do note the justifications for suspending the writ: in cases of invasion, insurrection or when the public safety may require it. The public isn’t very safe if those charged with enforcing the laws decide not to because their loyalty isn’t to the Republic, but to a Communist revolution which will overthrow the Republic.

The bottom line of Article 4, section 4 is that we are not allowed – no matter how much we might want to – to vote ourselves into tyranny. 99% of the people of California could vote to impose a Bolshevik Dictatorship, and that vote would be immediately null and void per the Constitution…and if the people of California decided to resist the restoration of freedom, then the writ of habeas corpus could be suspended and everyone in California trying to support the Bolshevik government could be arrested and held without trial.

What we’re seeing in the deeply Progressive areas of the United States is people voting for tyranny – voting for DA’s who won’t enforce laws; voting to excuse themselves from provisions of federal laws (the “sanctuary cities”. eg); allowing non-left voices to be physically attacked; threatening people with fines and tortuous legal action for merely dissenting. My question: how far do we let it go? My view is that we’ve let it go far enough, other’s may dispute this; but in the end, we’re either going to enforce our Constitution or we’re not…the Left is counting on us not enforcing it until they’ve gained enough power to simply do away with it. And make no mistake about it: that is what they want – an end to liberty, and end to property, and end to free thought. Their goal is a socialist future. That they believe this to be a good thing – meaning, that some of them sincerely think they are working for our benefit – is irrelevant. We know where this leads – how long will we let them advance? Where is our line in the sand?

We have to decide that, and decide it very soon. And if we want to have this be a peaceful push back, then our best recourse is to use the tools the Founders entrusted to us, including the tools designed to protect people from their own folly. The Founders knew full well that people – being at times perverse – would vote for very asinine things. They gave wide latitude for such idiocy – and, indeed, no sane person will lightly try to interfere with local self government. But, come on: we’ve got full blown Communists undermining the rule of law; we’ve got insane homeless people defecating and pissing on the streets; we’ve got masses of illegal immigrants being protected in violation of law; things are getting a bit out of hand…and they’ll get worse if we don’t start to take action.