Tag: progressives

Democrat’s Blind-spot is Facts, GOP’s Blind-spot is Emotion on This One – Nanny State Over-reach

The one US political party, including both wings, gets various national topics so wrong almost 100% of the time whether it is the economy, foreign policy OR their favorite one to argue over, the nanny/police state.

As David Stockman points out clearly in his article “Triumph of the Woke Mob Led By Two Doddering Old Fools” …

Nanny State over-reach was the underlying cause of George Floyd’s arrest and  unjust death—just as it is the source of most of America’s unfortunate violence between  police and unarmed citizens, back, white and otherwise.

The facts of ‘racism’ NOT causing all this doesn’t deter the Democrats since it has been an effective rallying cry and the GOP remains stuck in the religious fervor around the blue-line’s effort in the War on Drugs/People overreach. In fact, the blow-back of each wing’s push just intensifies the whole conflict with disrespects the people while triggering the masses to back the state in whatever solutions they come up with. It is a sick cycle  that sees the poor, disadvantaged and unarmed at the mercy of the state.

Needless to say, the George Floyd case was not an aberration. During the recent past  there were 38 such police killings of unarmed black citizens in 2015, and then 19, 21,  17 and 9 during 2016 through 2019, respectively. That’s 104 black lives lost to the  ultimate abuse of police powers.

Of course, the number should be zero police killings of unarmed citizens. There is no  conceivable excuse for heavily armed cops—-usually working in pairs or groups—to  cause the death of lone, unarmed civilians, regardless of race or anything else.

Unarmed seems to still unnerve the state-empowered police effort, however, it gets even more ridiculous when one learns the REASON the police were involved:

.. the Minneapolis police officers originally attempted to put George Floyd  safely in the back seat of a squad car after his arrest for the petty crime of attempting to  pass a counterfeit $20 bill, but he resisted them intensely for up to five minutes .. Floyd’s death was due to an arrest which shouldn’t have happened and bad police  behavior that has nothing to do with race.

Yup. the Left’s “it’s because he’s black” doesn’t stick here and the GOP’s “he should just bow to the Redcoats and the crown” doesn’t either. This “crime” is outside the scope of the police, as it was the store’s issue to deal with as there was zero threat of violence from this man towards others and towards the Redcoats.

During the same five-year period in which 104 black lives were lost, a total of 127  unarmed white lives were wasted by the police, as well. That included 32 white  killings in 2015 followed by 22, 31, 23 and 19 in 2016 through 2019, respectively.

Overall, 302 unarmed citizens were killed by the police during those five years, with  the balance accounted for by 71 deaths among Hispanic and other victims. That is, the  real issue is illegal and excessive police violence, not racial victimization.

Indeed, the fact that 34% of these police killings involved black citizens compared to  their 13% share of the population is not primarily a sign of racism among police forces,  although it is continuously construed to be.

It’s actually evidence that the Nanny State, and especially the misbegotten War on  Drugs, is designed to unnecessarily ensnare a distinct demographic— young, poor, often  unemployed urban citizens— in confrontations with the cops, too many of which  become fatal.

Alas, young black males are disproportionately represented among this particular in harms’-way demographic, and that’s the reason they are “disproportionately”  represented in the 302 cases cited above.

White lives matter too, so the facts seem to suggest a “wrong place at a wrong time” situation here as the police only target the part of town that has a lot of young, poor and unemployed.  Amazingly, getting anyone hopped up on power can easily expand the scope of involvement of the Redcoats in the area, not content with solving REAL crime, they focus on low-hanging fruit just like a deputized HOA Karen does:

But I digress.

.. statism in the sphere of law and order is every bit as dysfunctional as it is  in the realm of economics, yet neither conservatives nor progressives recognize it.

The US political system loves dysfunction, because it creates more “business” for itself.

It was at this point in the article I thought this was a summary, but as it turns out, David Stockman does straight into the data after offering this synopsis:

Conservatives want way too much law and police empowerment in the service of cultural  norms that are none of the state’s damn business in the first place; and progressives  confuse the often brutal and unjust over-reach of law enforcement agencies as a  manifestation of racism, when it is actually just policing expectorations in behalf of  inappropriate missions such as the enforcement of drug laws.

The data is revealing for the Nanny State’s real impact on the people, it is deathly.

  1. George Floyd’s fatal arrest for  allegedly passing a counterfeit $20 bill; Eric Garner (NYC 2014), subdual for selling un-taxed cigarettes; Rayshard Brooks for falling asleep drunk in his car at a subsequently  incinerated Wendy’s in Atlanta; and Breonna Taylor of Louisville for being awake in her  own apartment at 1:30 AM when police barged in with guns blaring in a drug  enforcement raid. 

  2. In  the most recent year of complete data (2018), there were 9.3 million arrests in the US  excluding traffic enforcement charges of DUI. Yet among this massive number of arrests, those involving serious crimes against persons and property accounted for just  521,000 or 5.6%. These included:  Negligent murder and manslaughter: 11,970;  Rape: 25,205;  Armed robbery: 88,128;  Aggravated assault: 395,800;  That’s it. That’s the contribution to core public safety delivered by the 850,000 sworn  law enforcement officers in the USA—about 0.6 arrests per year for serious crimes per  law enforcement officer. 

  3. the single largest category of arrests in 2018 was for drug abuse violations,  which totaled 1,654,282. In fact, while total arrests for all crimes in 2018 were no higher than they were in 1977  despite a 100 million/50% growth in the US population, and had actually dropped from  a peak of nearly 13 million in 2006, the opposite trend was extant in the case of the  nation’s misbegotten War on Drugs arrests.  As shown by the chart below, drug arrests in 2018 were nearly at peak levels and were  up by more than 171% since 1977—the vast majority of which are made for drug  possession generally, and marijuana possession most often.

  4. the next largest arrest category after drugs is one called “other  assaults” for which 1,063,535 arrests were made in 2018. Yet the FBI’s own definitions  raise considerable doubts as to why these are even a proper matter for law enforcement  by the state:

    Other assaults (simple)―Assaults and attempted assaults where no  weapon was used or no serious or aggravated injury resulted to the  victim. Stalking, intimidation, coercion, and hazing are included.

  5. Next category we have all the victimless and vice crimes, including the following  number of arrests:  Prostitution and commercialized vice: 31,147; Sex offenses excluding rape and prostitution: 46,937;  Gambling: 3,323;  Liquor law offenses: 173,152;  Curfew and loitering law violations: 22,031;  Vagrancy: 23,546;  Public drunkenness: 328,772;  Disorderly conduct: 329,152;  Forgery and counterfeiting: 50,072;  Weapons carrying and possession: 168,403;  All other offenses: 3,231,700. The latter huge number tells you all you need to know. The UCR lists 27 enumerated  categories of crime including all of those itemized above yet when  the whole lists is exhausted, 32% of arrests occurred for crimes that are so minor even  the FBI is embarrassed to enumerate them!

Nothing like majoring in the minors! But I guess that is what “pays the bills”, Redcoats extracting loot from the people. Some things never change and government will never be your savior from this evil and broken world.

Ya think? Lord Acton was spot on!

The masses seem to believe there are only two options in decision-making, which is why the US political-complex limits itself to GOP and Democrats. Yet there is a third option, a road much less traveled. This is a path that reduces one’s dependency on the Nanny State and takes life underground.

Something to think about right?

-SF1

Lost Opportunities: 1776, 1787 and 1861 led to 1865 and Beyond

The efforts toward freedom and liberty have been frustrated for centuries, and it was in the mid-late 1700s where such promise seemed at hand. The American colonies were left on auto-pilot until the British Empire was hoping for some ROI and decided to push for some taxes and control. Please note that human nature’s default is that those in power will push for control as well as compensation for their “management” of society towards orderly conduct.

It does seem to be that the people of this era were pretty well versed (no pun intended) in what they experienced and learned in nature as well as what wisdom could be found in the Bible. It was these kind of people (think Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine) that would help draft the Declaration of Independence.

There is a line in this document that does acknowledge ” the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” as well as “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” as well as “that all men are created equal”. That last quote never implies that we are to be made equal by man, but that God sees us each as equal, as in made on God’s image, uniquely.

So in God’s/Nature’s God eyes, we are all equal, BUT we are each unique and never equal while on this earth. We are born with different gifts and talents, with various thinking capacities as well as emotional and physical capacities. Men are not the same as women, but equal in God’s eyes.

The problem comes with the progressive always wants to play god and make plans to “make” everyone equal, to “make” the climate perfect and to second-guess God’s decision that we are either male or female. They think so highly of themselves that they feel they can improve on what God has created. I am guessing if they want to work on themselves, then I say let them. However, they are never content with that .. they want their ideas to be applied across society with force. This is where government enters.

The opposing force to these ideas used to be the church but it seems like there is so much in-fighting in those circles that there is little energy left to bring wisdom to the discussion. Another opposing force, or so I thought, were “conservatives”. Well, while we have heard for decades about the conservative (political) fight .. it is just smoke and mirrors because obviously there are zero principles involved.

The conservatives have not just recently let the people down in this regard, even in 1871 critical thinkers saw the GOP “conservatives” for what they are .. Robert Lewis Dabney here calls them out for what they were in his day:

“.. Northern conservatism. This is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation..”

“.. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious for the sake of the truth, and has no idea of being guilty of the folly of martyrdom. It always—when about to enter a protest—very blandly informs the wild beast whose path it essays to stop, that its “bark is worse than its bite,” and that it only means to save its manners by enacting its decent role of resistance. The only practical purpose which it now subserves in American politics is to give enough exercise to Radicalism to keep it “in wind,” and to prevent its becoming pursy and lazy from having nothing to whip…” [source https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/blog/equality-is-not-americas-founding-principle ]

In summary, it seems like the opportunity presented in 1776 birthed 13 free and independent colonies by 1783, but quickly was swallowed up by the political fears that led to 1787’s coup d’etat when the US Constitution was secretly birthed and ratified in the next two years. No longer was Nature’s God acknowledged until the Confederate Constitution was ratified in 1861.

The failure of the seven, eleven or thirteen states to secede peacefully from the United States of America would put an end of a reliance on “Almighty God” and His Word, the Bible, in trusting Him with our future as a people and as a country.

The future looks more and more like being first century Christians in the Roman Empire.  Always in the minority and always despised until they see the love we can share from our Almighty God and then things may turn around.

-SF1

Will President Trump Refrain from Total War Against Some States, Unlike Lincoln?

A couple posts ago I lamented about the GOP’s DNA from the birth of that political party that Lincoln was elected under:

.. in 2020, the Trump administration would never concede to have GOP majority states secede from the US and allow the Democrats to have the empire. The GOP’s DNA is war and empire.

However, could the Trump administration stray from their DNA (I mean with politicians, “principles” are easily discarded)? Could the GOP part with large sections of California, New York and New England? Could the city-states of Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland and Cincinnati (along with other Democratic majority cities in various states) be allowed to go on their own and pay their own way?

This is a real question. No one, I mean no one brings this up because supposedly states can’t secede, but I really think it is because BOTH parties are Marxist at their core.

Lincoln was adored by Karl Marx, and the Progressives since 1901 have been in control of this country’s leadership and cemented the deal in 1913 with Constitutional amendment to place the private entity the Federal Reserve in charge of the fiat currency (USD).

While I really doubt any politician these days thinks philosophically, the statesmen of yesterday did. It was important for the likes of Jefferson, Calhoun and even Jefferson Davis to get it right, based on principle.

While the Constitution is not in the forefront of 2020’s political debates between Twitter Trump and Dementia Joe, the statesmen of 1861 saw it all clear as day. I would say that the following is why the southern seven states that seceded were so confident of a peaceful separation, because in their mind their ancestors did the same in 1776.

Article 3 Section 3 of the US Constitution defines treason as follows:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or to adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort

The words THEM and THEIR refer to who? Well, the truth is the first time the “United States” was written it was the “united States”. That is why it is plural, a collection, a federation, a confederacy of states. So levying “War” against them was about going to war with Massachusetts or Virginia, or any other state!

Technically then, there is NO treason except that against the individual states themselves according to the US Constitution. Opposition to Washington DC is NOT therefore treason! Nor is defending your own state from Washington DC.

Let that soak in before I proceed. Doesn’t this all have a connection to 2020?

Now look at 1861 from this Constitutional perspective and we see that Lincoln made war, not just on the seven states that left the union by FEB1861, but also against the four others that left after Lincoln called up volunteers in APR1861 after Fort Sumter’s surrender. Lincoln is guilty of treason, but don’t expect the US history books to state that fact.

In essence, Lincoln engaged in treason for four years and redefined treason, not by a constitutional amendment, but with cannon and rifles. Treason became to include anyone who was critical of the US general government or himself. As a result he suspended the writ of habeas corpus and had his soldiers arrest and imprison thousands of northern civilians for speaking up against him in public, for publishing newspaper articles in opposition to his policies.  Lincoln had congressmen arrested, arrested the grandson of the author of the Star Spangled Banner, Francis Scott Key and also had a congressman from Ohio deported to Canada. Lincoln even arrested those who chose to remain silent when hearing Lincoln’s policies discussed!

The man who stands by and says nothing when the peril of his Government is discussed cannot be misunderstood. If not hindered, he is sure to help the enemy, much more if he talks ambiguously – talks for his country with “buts” and “ifs” and “ands”. – Abraham Lincoln

The bottom line is that Lincoln never publicly admitted that secession of any state took place and placed his trust in Article 4 Section 4 of the US Constitution that allows the federal government to protect the citizens of any state from “domestic Violence”.  However, the Constitution couches this in first receiving a request to do so from that state’s legislature or governor. The southern eleven states NEVER asked for assistance with “domestic violence”.

Lincoln is a certified tyrant guilty of treason.

How tempting it must be for President Trump, in command of the American Empire’s military might, to only bring a fraction of that force “for good” against any state that is currently dealing with domestic violence.

If he is wiser that Lincoln, he would have followed the US Constitution and waited until asked.

Will Trump pull a full-on Lincoln? Time will tell.

Peace out.

-SF1

Trajectory of the State: What Happens When Statists Overplay their Hand?

It has been a good run for state worshipers. The 1800s gave more and more people the belief that the state could bring about a good utopia for all to enjoy. (Outside those who saw peril in the state, like those in the most southern seven US states in the “deep south” in 1860 and 1861)

By the end of the 1800s it seemed that the progressive movement was about to birth and bring about a century of peace. However, WWI and WWI PLUS all the genocides of the 20th century meant millions died during as well as outside of official wars.

By the end of the 20th century we saw two collectivist Communist states morph in various ways towards entities that pay more attention to well-being of the taxpayers. Russia emerged out of a God-less era to embrace family and Christianity in the 20th century. China backed off on the underground Church (that was thriving under persecution) to a degree where this is tolerated in this Communism version 2.X coupled with quite a capitalist friendly environment where regulations are minimized that allow entrepreneurship to thrive. While these states are not perfect, it does appear they have learned the lessons of the 20th century.

This brings us to the US state complex that is exceptional enough that it still believes there are no lessons to learn. However, if Lew Rockwell’s post “Working Around Leviathan” predictions are true, their days are numbered as they get less and less relevant in society as technology advances so much faster than the state can digest it.

Lew does a great job at balancing the forces at work in 2020, where he compares the US state apparatus:

Never before has a government in human history owned more weapons of mass destruction, looted as much wealth from a country, or assumed unto itself the power to regulate the minutiae of daily life as much as this one. By comparison to the overgrown behemoth in Washington, with its printing press to crank out money for the world and its annual $2.2 trillion dollars in largesse to toss at adoring crowds, even communist states were powerless paupers.

.. to the private commercial/business side:

At the same time — and here is the paradox — the United States is overall the wealthiest society in the history of the world. The World Bank lists Luxembourg, Switzerland, and Norway as competitive in this regard, but the statistics don’t take into account the challenges to mass wealth that exist in the US relative to small, homogenous states such as its closest competitors. In the United States, more people from more classes and geographic regions have access to more goods and services at prices they can afford, and possess the disposable income and access to credit to put them to use, than any other time in history. Truly we live in the age of extreme abundance.

Some will claim it is the government’s role that has made especially large corporations most successful and should receive credit for all they do. However, Lew is quick to point out a disclaimer to that effect, but not before sharing what both the so-called “right” and so-called “left” tend to think:

It seems that people on the right and left are quick to confuse correlation with causation. They believe that the US is wealthy because the government is big and expansive. This error is probably the most common of all errors in political economy. It is just assumed that buildings are safe because of building codes, that stock markets are not dens of thieves because of the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission), that the elderly don’t starve and die because of Social Security, and so on, all the way to concluding that we should credit big government for American wealth.

I do hope you chuckled as you read this. Only those in DC would take this seriously, most of the rest of us recognize sarcasm.

If we are looking for those that create value and wealth, do we think of government? Does on think of Obamacare, Amtrak or the United States Postal Service?

Government is not productive. It has no wealth of its own. All it acquires it must take from the private sector. You might believe that it is necessary and you might believe it does great good, but we must grant that it does not have the ability to produce wealth in the way the market does.

If you understand economics, or if you have ever spent time in a monopoly, you will find that they do not have any good feedback loop that helps them indicate what the market needs. Government is even more handicapped since no one in their bureaucracy is ever accountable for government action or inaction. They simply have no skin in the game and do not see the taxpayers as customers:

Economic law limits what the state can do. The state cannot raise wages for everyone. It cannot dampen prices that want to rise without causing shortages, or increase prices that want to fall without causing surpluses. It cannot predict the course of markets or human events. It can control surprisingly few forces that work in the world.

In all its central planning, government is forever declaring the major combat operations are over, whether in foreign or domestic policy, only to discover that its real struggles and battles last and last. A good example is in the area of foreign trade. If a good or service is more efficiently produced abroad, the logic of the market will reassign production patterns until they conform. An attempt to protect domestic industry can do nothing to change this reality. Instead, protection only increases prices for consumers, subsidizes inefficient firms, and brings about ever-increasing amounts of wasted time, work, and resources.

On the other hand are those that seek to truly bring value to the market and are rewarded with wealth that can be placed into capital improvements that can make the business even more productive, efficient and even adaptable to the changing market. This was seen by the 1700 and 1800 farmers all the way to the manufacturers of the 1800s that could accomplish this all without government involvement.

Lasting prosperity can only come about through human effort in the framework of a market economy that allows people to cooperate to their mutual advantage, innovate and invest in an environment of freedom, retain earnings as private property, and save generation to generation without fear of having estates looted through taxation and inflation. This is the source of wealth. This is the means by which a rising population is fed, clothed, and housed. This is the method by which even the poorest country can become rich.

I will only add one more quote and if you are interested, please read all of Lew’s words that at least to me, give hope for the generations to come:

But here I would like to concentrate on what I think is an explanation that is too often overlooked. It requires that we understand something about the extraordinary capacity of the human mind to overcome obstacles put in its path. In all the history of states and the history of reflection on social organization and economics, this component is the most underestimated because it is the least predictable and the most difficult to comprehend. Human beings are creative and determined, and, if they have a love of liberty, and cooperate through exchange, they can overcome seemingly impassable obstacles.

It is because of this power of human ingenuity and determination to improve the world around us, despite the state, that a vast gulf has come to separate the accumulated power of the nation-state from its effective power in the management and guidance of society and the world economy.

Yes, despite the state, human ingenuity can improve the world, as well as its parallel, despite religion, humans with God’s help and hope, can improve the world in loving those around them.

Praying that the future does see the archaic state fall by the wayside and that grassroots communities with free trade on a global basis can improve the lives of those all over the world.

One can dream can’t they?

Acts 2:17

Your sons and your daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, and your old men will dream dreams.

-SF1