Sunday, August 28

(Not Another) Another Pop Quiz

Just where does the moral authority of "government" come from? 
"Consent of the governed"? 
If there is consent, what need is there for "Government"? 

How does any entity's "authority" become a command I am forced to obey without my consent and ultimately jail (capital offenses excepted)? 

If "Government is Force" (G.Washington), how does Force become moral when administered by Government? 

Was there ever a Government that was not imposed on the citizens without force? 

If "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" (Lord Acton), how can "limited government" mean anything other than "limited but eventual tyranny"? 

How is the Libertarian belief in the forecast success of "Limited Government" not analogous to Limited Pregnancy? 

What Government of any political persuasion has permanently, successfully preserved the natural rights of all its citizens? 

Isn't self-governance the ultimate "limited" and moral government? 
If not, why not? 
If so, what need is there for "Government"? 

How have Government anywhere in the world in your lifetime, been doing with that "Freedom and Justice for all" thing? Preserved and upheld them? Or eroded and debased them slowly, gradually, inexorably? 

This is a Timed Test - and you don't have much left.

Extra Credit Question: When making dogmatic statements about the "purpose of government" and "authority", who empowers you to use "we" and "us" and "society"? Without the agreement of the Individual, aren't those Statist/Collectivist terms?


Moderator's Comment:
Call it whatever you wish. As long as the "Majority", by whatever means, can superimpose its will on the Minority with the force of law, some spawn of Tyranny can be the only result.

Sunday, August 21

Another Recent FB exchange....


Someone posted the coming appearance of LP candidates Johnson/Weld on some show with noted FOX lonely Libertarian, John Stossel, and asked if everyone reading would tune in. I posted "Not I because neither Johnson or Weld were Libertarians and many of their stated positions were contrary to Libertarian philosophy." The following exchange then took place:


Jacqueline Passey Mason Brian Wilson Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Would you rather vote for Trump or Clinton?
Like · Reply · 3 hrs

Brian Wilson
Brian Wilson If you believe - as Libertarians claim - in Self-Governance, why do you need to elect a "leader" at all? If you believe - as Libertarian claim - in the Free Market, how can you support the immoral monopoly of Force via Government, regardless of who is in the WH? Considering the total corruption of "the system" and the predictably flaccid financial "support" from rank & file Libertarians, do you believe Johnson-Weld have a snowball's chance of actually winning? And even if they did, do you really believe the R & D Congress would support ANY dismantling of "The System" they have constructed and support? Posing the Trump/Clinton "choice" ignores the only intelligent alternative: Yourself.


* Note: Ms. Mason did not respond - nor did any other stalwart Libertarian - because they can't without betraying the hypocrisy - or, at least, irreconcilable inconsistencies in their positions. They ignore the plain spoken observation of Washington: "Government is Force" and the pure truth of Lord Action: "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely." What more needs to be said? Is there any wrinkle in time in the history of the mankind that Government has a sustained record orfpeace, prosperity and advancing Liberty? (Spoiler alert: No) Quite the contrary. Government holds the record for people murdered, property stolen or destroyed, rights trampled, Freedom suppressed.

The belief that electing the "least of 4 evils" will somehow result in Peace breaking out is ludicrous - just as "small government" only translates as "little bit pregnant",



Monday, August 8

Mencken again

Thought for the Daze

Morality is doing what’s right regardless of what you’re told.
Obedience is doing what you’re told regardless of what is right.


- H.L. Mencken

Saturday, August 6

Another Facebook Exchange


XXXX In my eyes he's [Johnson] the only logical choice. Just my opinion

Brian Wilson "In my eyes he's the only logical choice." Actually - if you dare argue "logic" - the answer is unequivocally "don't vote at all". If you maintain you are for Libertarian "self government", then voting for a " ruler" with the power to inflict the immoral Force of Government upon you is either terminally stupid or remarkably hypocritical - but it is no way "logical". Irrespective of that, I most certainly support your right to your opinion - as untenable as it may be.

Like · Reply 

XXXX I'm not an anarchist. I simply believe that the governments only job is to protect our rights outlined in the constitution. Any step in that direction would be amazing. It would be much better than them taking our rights!!!

Like · Reply ·

Brian Wilson As recorded history has proven, It is virtually impossible for Govt to do the job you want. Acton nailed it: "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely." Govt is nothing but the organized exercise of power. Power requires Force. While the use of Force in defense of inalienable rights may be admirable, it has never even been achieved with any permanence due to the toxic corrosion from the monopoly on Force thru Power given to Government. The quaint notion that any individual can do this thru the imagined magic of elected office is beyond "hypocrisy"; it is simply not possible. You might want to give Anarchism an thorough and objective examination. You may be surprised to find precisely what you want - in an entirely different form.

Like · Reply ·

Saturday, July 30

Thought for the Days



The persistent existence of Liberals is due to their immunity to any infection of intelligence that will cure their Aggressive Ignorance. When faced with irrefutable facts, Liberals cling to their indefensible opinions the same way they ridicule Conservatives “clinging to their guns and Bibles”. The significant difference being Conservatives are principally motivated to defend their inalienable right to Life, Liberty and Happiness. In contrast, the Liberals’ minds are in permanent lockdown, thoroughly resistant to any reasoned enlightenment that threatens their oppressive worldview of entitlement to authority and power over others into subservience through unbridled, aggressive force.

- Brian Wilson

Tuesday, July 26

Free Movie!

Clinton Cash, a feature documentary based on the Peter Schweizer book, has been posted to YouTube for all to view free just in time for the DNC. Clinton Cash investigates how Bill and Hillary Clinton went from being “dead broke” after leaving the White House to amassing a net worth of over $150 million, with over $2 billion in donations to their foundation. This wealth was accumulated during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State through lucrative speaking fees and contracts paid for by foreign companies and Clinton Foundation donors.

The New York Times hailed the book as “The most anticipated and feared book of a presidential cycle" while MSNBC described the documentary as devastating for the Hillary campaign.

The Clinton camp has, of course, dismissed the documentary as a right-wing smear campaign filled with unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. That said, perhaps the most shocking aspect of the release is that many of the biggest bombshells revealed in the documentary have been vetted and confirmed by various mainstream media outlets. More recently, some information uncovered in the Panama Papers has echoed some of Schweitzer’s allegations in the movie and book.

Click here - and Share
Clinton Cash