Dec 09 2021

“Legal” Theft

And the state in which I still own a house is one of the worst – South Carolina.

Now, there is much to love about SC. The people are generally friendly, they have strong family ties, the children are generally quite civil and polite, and the winter temps are a relief, after having lived in Cleveland, OH for many years. Just NOT having to scrape the ice and snow off your car in the winter is tremendous.

But, the state legislature is too complacent about the many abuses of Civil Forfeiture, which hits the Black population harder than it does the White population. Black people are more likely to not have access to a bank account, or other ways to put their money safely away. They are more likely to keep it in their car or on their person, making them more vulnerable to losing it in any encounter with the police.

 “Black men pay the price for this program. They represent 13 percent of the state’s population. Yet 65 percent of all citizens targeted for civil forfeiture in the state are black males.”

Those encounters don’t have to involve a crime – or, even, an arrest. Many people have had their cash taken without having any recourse, except to hire a lawyer (good luck with that if you’ve lost access to your money!).

So, for all the people I’ve heard saying how the Red states will provide safety and freedom, I can only say:

Look, the Red states – and, yes, many of them ARE in the South – are not uniformly supportive of the freedom and dignity of citizens. Local and state governments often do abuse their power to act against Americans. They don’t always respect Constitutional Rights, or even Human Rights.

That’s why I’m not concerned about leaving the Red for a state that is generally classified as Blue. I know that moving to a “freer” state is not a solution, by itself.

No, Americans need to learn that – no matter where you live or work – Freedom doesn’t come freely. You have to be prepared to push back against the bullies – even the government ones – that try to keep you from your Sovereign Rights.

Sure, you probably won’t want to stay in a place that is more abusive than not. And, I can’t honestly counsel people NOT to leave, should they be able to without a huge financial or personal penalty.

But, just walking away from an overbearing government is no more the answer than walking out on an abusive spouse. Even after you leave, you will likely have problems. If not with that person, you will often manage to find another abusive a$$hole who will push you around.

The cure is to develop a spine. Learn to tell them NO. And, when they push you, push back (metaphorically). Figure out how to clip their wings, whether by refusing to stick around, hiring a lawyer, going public about the abuse, disentangling yourself financially, or whatever it takes.

Dec 09 2021

Watching Independence Day

That movie always makes me cry. I’m at the point when the President – a guy who, although a movie star, really ACTS like a President – is giving the speech that precedes the attack. He talks about how humanity will NOT go quietly, will NOT lie down and die. Very different from today’s “leaders”, who expect us to be sheep, lining up for shearing (or worse!).

I really don’t believe that The Left know just how many of us are out there. The old and tired, the young and untested, the veterans, the never-in-combat ones, even those who – technically – are not Americans – all of us who are determined not to give up our freedom without a hell of a fight.

And, likely, not even then.

They just cannot imagine it. Imagine someone willing to kill/die rather than live like a slave. Rather than give up the essence of what citizenship means. To be willing to die on their feet, rather than live on their knees.

That’s what we are.

Free men and women. Descended from others who risked it all to possess that freedom.

God help them if they continue to stand in our way.

Dec 09 2021

Monopolies And What They Want

     I’ve got news for you, Gentle Reader: You are a monopoly.

     Surprised? It’s true, though: You are the one and only source for goods and services made by you. Because of the 13th Amendment, you have absolute control over the source of those goods and services. Assuming you’re not incarcerated for a felony crime, of course.

     Monopolies aren’t usually thought of in quite that fashion, of course. Our “naive” view of monopolies is based on a goods category: cars, computers, chimichangas, and so forth. Yet even that kind of monopoly is more common than many would suppose. Consider regional cable-television providers as an example.

     Every now and then some large organization will be targeted by the bien-pensants as a monopoly. The masters of that organization will struggle to come up with some countermeasure for the negative characterization. It’s not easy, given the connotations of the term. When we consider that in denotative terms a true monopoly – one with absolute control of access to some category of good – is exceedingly rare, it complicates matters still further.

     Some years ago, a regional movie-theater chain was forbidden to acquire the theaters of another, smaller chain by the Federal Trade Commission. The FTC’s rationale was that the would-be acquirer already owned 10% of the theaters in its region! God forbid that such a monopoly should grow any more “dominant.” If this seems to you to put an unjustifiable strain on the notion of a monopoly, you’re not alone.

     Before I proceed further, allow me to reassure you that I’m no fan of giantism. In the usual case, a giant organization is massively inefficient and glacially torpid in the face of change. Most giant organizations got that way by failing to concentrate on their core specialty and haring off after other prizes. This is neither good for the organization nor good for those it purports to serve.

     That having been said, under a specified set of conditions, some sorts of enterprise must be huge to be viable. That will naturally limit the number of competitors in that economic sector. However, such an enterprise will be unusually vulnerable to changes in those enveloping conditions. For example, General Motors, which once sold over half the cars produced each year, was very slow to react to the technological advances that made much smaller, more lightly capitalized automakers viable. It cost GM quite a lot of market share.

     In brief: In an environment susceptible to significant social, economic, technological, and legal changes, the larger the monopoly or quasi-monopoly, the shorter its period of viability. Of course, those who captain such organizations dislike to face the music. When change threatens them, they man the barricades. Far too often, they seek assistance from the biggest, most threatening monopoly of all: government.

***

     Elon Musk, whom I’m beginning to like quite a lot, has ruffled some feathers:

     Musk — who serves as chief executive of both Tesla and SpaceX — made the remarks during The Wall Street Journal’s CEO Council Summit, where he also slammed President Biden’s domestic agenda.

     “It does not make sense to take the job of capital allocation away from people who have demonstrated great skill in capital allocation, and give it to an entity that has demonstrated very poor skill in capital allocation, which is the government,” he commented.

     “Government is simply the biggest corporation, with the monopoly on violence.”

     Incontrovertibly true…but it won’t make him any friends in Washington D.C., nor in the Mahogany Rows and corporate boardrooms of other large companies. The big secret is that our grotesquely swollen government is a cancer that’s poised to eat the rest of the body politic. Without that cancer, which has obligingly created levels of taxation and regulation that promote giant corporations while disfavoring small ones and inhibiting startups, the American economy would look much different.

     I’ve already written about this. The analysis hasn’t changed over the twenty-six years since I penned that essay. We’re nearer to the collapse of the thing than we were, but nothing else has changed, except for the number of Americans whose livelihood depends on giant corporations.

     Giant corporations are like “the High” in 1984. Their aim is to remain “the High.” They’ll sacrifice quite a lot of other things to remain viable. Compare this to the behavior of politicians and bureaucrats. I trust I need say no more.

     Now the widely respected Elon Musk has used the word monopoly in characterizing government. Perhaps that will open a few eyes. At any rate, more Americans listen when he talks than when I do. Just an early-morning thought.

Dec 08 2021

Patriotism, Or Racism and/or Xenophobia?

I do find it mystifying that love of your country is a GOOD thing, unless the Lover is not a PoC (Person of Color).

The thing is, EVERYONE is biased towards the values and culture of the country in which they grew up. We recall the sights and smells and sounds of our life in that country (in a Proustean way), and have a rush of emotion that supersedes any intellectual overlay. That love taps into the primitive parts of our brain, and is not easily dislodged.

When I remember the America of my childhood, it was rich in ethnic languages, non-WASPy faces, and smells of the cuisine of foreign lands.

For, I grew up in the 1950s and 1960s, a time in which the refugees of the world eagerly rushed in. With them, they brought their cultural heritage, their food and clothing, and their stories of their beloved country of exile.

In time, their children became wholly American. Many of them spoke only a few dimly remembered words of the old language. They were eager to wear the clothing of America, dance and sing to its songs, and become enmeshed in its popular culture. By the time they became parents, little remained of the heritage of their ancestors.

And, such has been a common experience in our country. Many of the newly arrived settled in, initially in nationality-tight enclaves. As time went on, they moved out into the suburbs, where their children grew up surrounded by people who spoke and read English, who followed the American cultural norms, and who expected to be able to benefit from the American Dream in their own lives.

The kids became truly Americans. And, in the process, broke the connections with the ancestral heritage of their families.

Such a process was known as Assimilation. And, at that time, it was considered a Good Thing.

Those kids, having dipped into the American Dream, felt free to date and marry other Americans, regardless of their ethnicity. That included people who had grown up with different religions. And, those who didn’t share a skin color.

The thing such couples had in common was a common love for this country and its traditions.

New Topic:

Apparently, there is some credible talk about China having built containerized missiles, that they plan to ship in on regular shipping vessels (it is likely a violation of international law).

The scheme is really interesting; it’s quite flexible, as it can be transported via ship, truck, or rail. It also has the advantage of hiding in plain sight.

Now, is it a LIKELY scenario?

China may try it. They may even manage to get some of the container missiles inside the USA. Perhaps in high-value target locations.

But, without regular maintenance, such missiles are unlikely to be useful beyond a relatively short period.

They need to be checked and serviced. The software needs to be checked regularly. The hardware is vulnerable to local weather conditions. Ethnic Chinese going in and out of storage locations will be a red flag to observers.

But, the idea has some merit, I will acknowledge.

For us.

I’d suggest the military throw some good engineers at the problem of fabricating those delivery systems – hell, we have battalions of them available in the military – and put them to working out some designs that use off the shelf components, can be fitted into standard containers readily available, will be insulated and weather-proofed, and can be serviced – both remotely, more often, and in-person, less regularly. And, have mechanical backup, should the EMP disaster happen.

Store them outside of major cities/transportation hubs on the West Coast and near overseas air bases controlled by friendlies (Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, et al). NOT in the boonies. The point of such missiles is to get them near the targets.

Dec 08 2021

Crushing the Vaccine Dissidents

It’s happening, and not just in Australia.

In the USA, it’s happening via the schools, large corporations, and local efforts. The not-that-serious Omicron variant – what you and I would characterize as basically a cold – is being used as an excuse to remove civil rights from dissidents:

I would expect a push to get The Center for Medicare Services (CMS) to change their policy to forbid treatment for the unvaxxed seniors. So far, CMS has held firm (although allowing differential premiums for vaxxed/unvaxxed). If the Left – and, by that term, I specifically include those Dopey GOP-ey Almost-A-Leftist A$$holes, wins in the next election, it may fall to the states to save our freedom.

Dec 08 2021

The Speculations Of Unbelievers

     Many persons who lack faith claim to be disturbed by those of us who have it. In some cases, this is because the unbeliever fails to understand the nature of a religious faith. In others, the unbeliever misunderstands or misconstrues an important characteristic of religious faith: inasmuch as it is unprovable by its nature, it is inseparable from doubt. Then there are those who simply like to mock us, but they’re best left to another essay.

     Certainty is an infinitely precious jewel, regardless of what it is we’d like to be certain about. When the subject is the supernatural, the existence of God, the nature of the Divine Plan, the properties of the afterlife, et cetera, certainty under the veil of Time is impossible. I could go into a long disquisition about this, but that, too, is best left to another essay. So for one who professes a faith to be struck now and then by doubts is entirely understandable. Sometimes, our responses to such doubts have an outward manifestation that puzzles those who don’t share our faith.

     Occasionally, doubt overwhelms faith. I know people who’ve suffered the loss of their faith. My phrasing is deliberate: having lost their faith caused them suffering that I could observe. In each case a shaft of doubt was responsible. They were unable to overcome the wound, and so lost something that had been a vital component of their metaphysical premises. It hurt them. In several cases it turned them bitter.

     Religious faith is not a baby’s blanket. It does not provide warmth and comfort at no cost. Indeed, the cost of a mature faith, to one of high intelligence, is considerable. And in this as in so many other areas of life, he who refuses to do the work will be denied the achievement.

***

     This is on my mind this morning for two reasons. The first is this essay, which I encountered at Mike Hendrix’s place. The second is what has often been called the Problem of Pain, or alternately the Problem of Evil. Many an unbeliever is thwarted by one or the other of these things. They ask “Why would a benevolent God create a universe in which His beloved people suffer?” or “If God is all good, then why does He tolerate evil?” Militant atheists hurl these questions at us like spears, secure in their conviction that they are insuperable…which they are not.

     The belief that Divine omnipotence makes a universe without pain or evil possible is at the core of the problem. Yes, a universe without pain or evil is possible. However it would lack the dimension of time, and the human attribute of free will.

     Our temporal universe possesses natural laws and the dimension of time. Time makes change possible. But natural laws – behavioral patterns built into all matter and energy – mean that change will sometimes be painful. Consider death as the most dramatic example.

     Free will is inherent in each man’s awareness of his individuality. Without it we would be automata without a moral-ethical nature. With it, evil – the choice to do harm to undeserving others – is possible. Combine free will with time, and the matter becomes clear.

     But these propositions are not provable in the mathematical sense. In a way they are as much elements of faith as is any statement about the supernatural. We can observe the world around us for as long as we like without seeing a disconfirming event. That doesn’t mean that we wouldn’t see one if we were to observe just a little longer. So while we may have a high degree of confidence in these concepts, we can never regard them as proven.

     This is both the case for faith and the case for doubt. For the reasons above, he who holds to a faith will occasionally be afflicted by doubt. The two conditions can never be separated permanently, death as a trivial exception.

***

     It is not unusual, for the reasons given above, for believers to strive to reassure themselves. Doubt is like that; if the proposition affected is important enough to the one stricken by doubt, he will strive to dispel it by one or another means. This is as observable in the sciences as it is in religious matters.

     The responses to a shaft of doubt are of many kinds. Some strike the more intelligent unbeliever as a manifestation of low intelligence: an “I can’t hear you / go away” reply to an objection that should be grappled with through reason and evidence. Sometimes that’s true, even if it’s unkind. But in many cases it’s merely an expression of the believer’s irritation at having to fend off arguments he’s heard and dismissed on quite enough occasions already.

     We are at the beginning of Advent, a time when Christians prepare themselves to commemorate the birth of Jesus Christ in mortal flesh. It’s common for doubt to manifest at this time, in part because of the militancy of militant atheists during this season and because the season itself presents special challenges. There’s no reason to think you’ll be exempted from that aspect of the “Christmas rush.” But the plus side is considerable: Faith grows stronger for being tested and surviving. It’s a frequently overlooked blessing.

     May God bless and keep you all.

Dec 07 2021

Separations

     (No, not “reparations.” Spelling matters at Liberty’s Torch. We’re carful about it. We proofread very carfully, both for spelling and to make sure we don’t any words out.)

     These days it seems like every noisy group in America wants “our own space.” That means different things to different people, of course, but the essence of it amounts to a kind of privatization campaign. These “our own space” types seek to create zones that you and I would have thought public – i.e., open to common traffic – in which only their sort are allowed and their preferences have the force of law.

     There’s a kind of logic to this. Private property has something of that characteristic. However, in serious matters a property owner can’t decree what’s lawful and what isn’t if the surrounding polity decides otherwise. Like it or not, it isn’t legal to kill your brother-in-law just because he tells offensive jokes at your dinner table and throws his cigarette butts on your lawn. (Horsewhipping him, though, is permitted in certain jurisdictions. Familiarize yourself with the local and state law codes before proceeding.)

     But the “our own space” types don’t follow the logic all the way. In the usual case, they demand absolute dominion over “our own space” but refuse to concede other groups that privilege within theirs. This is particularly the case in the matter of “black spaces.” Have a relevant vignette:

     About a year ago, I decided to build a library on my front lawn. By library, I mean one of those little free-standing library boxes that dot lawns in bedroom communities around the country — charming, birdhouse-like structures filled with books that invite neighbors and passers-by to take a book, or donate a book, or both.…

Then one morning, glancing out my front window, I saw a young white couple stopped at the library. Instantly, I was flooded with emotions — astonishment, and then resentment, and then astonishment at my resentment. It all converged into a silent scream in my head of, Get off my lawn!

The moment jolted me into realizing some things I’m not especially proud of. I had set out this library for all who lived here, and even for those who didn’t, in theory. I would not want to restrict anyone from looking at it or taking books, based on race or anything else. But while I had seen white newcomers to the neighborhood here and there, the truth was, I hadn’t set it out to appeal to white residents.…

What I resented was not this specific couple. It was their whiteness, and my feelings of helplessness at not knowing how to maintain the integrity of a Black space that I had created. I was seeing up close how fragile that space can be, how its meaning can be changed in my mind, even by people who have no conscious intention to change it. That library was on my lawn, but for that moment it became theirs. I built it and drove it into the ground because I love books and always have. But I suddenly felt that I could not own even this, something that was clearly and intimately mine.

     This…person exhibits a highly proprietary attitude over her “black space.” I have no doubt that were she challenged on it, she would defend her attitude with whatever vulgarities and aberrations of logic she could come up with. But imagine the uproar were a white woman to proclaim that her “little free library” is for whites only! Imagine the public outcry were a neighborhood to declare itself a “white space” and impose discouragements of some sort to through-passage by members of other races!

     Whites aren’t permitted proprietary spaces. The racialists’ playbook doesn’t allow such things. Their campaign to “chase down the last white person” would be fatally impeded by such spaces.

     So you see, the separations are one-way only. We’re not permitted to separate ourselves from them. No, we must accept their vulgarity, their disorder, their illegitimacy, their crime, and their mind-and-soul-destroying “culture” – at eardrum-shattering levels. The law, as it stands, is entirely on their side.

     There will come a reckoning. It could look like this, or it could be much bloodier. I’m no more able to see the exact shape of the future than anyone else, but pace Herbert Stein, the present state of affairs cannot continue indefinitely. Therefore, it will stop.

     That’s the racial status quo: a condition in which less than 13% of the American population – a fraction responsible for the greater part of the nation’s crime, disorder, government dependency, and other social pathologies – presumes to dictate how the rest must live. But there’s more than one noisy minority playing an absurdly demanding tune. Because the photo is somewhat blurry, here’s a transcription of its text:

     I couldn’t help but notice your Christmas lights display. During these unprecedented times we have all experienced challenges which casual words just don’t describe what we’re feeling. The idea of twinkling, colorful lights are a reminder of divisions that continue to run through our society, a reminder of systemic biases against our neighbors who don’t celebrate Christmas or who can’t afford to put up lights of their own.

     We must do the work of educating ourselves about the harmful impact an outward facing display like yours can have. I challenge you to respect the dignity of all people, while striving to learn from differences, ideas, and opinions of our neighbors. We must come together collectively and challenge these institutional inequities; St. Anthony is a community welcoming of all people and we must demand better for ourselves.

     Yes, Gentle Reader, it really says all that. A greater display of arrogance is difficult for me to imagine…yet the militant atheists are already out there, spreading their poisonous gospel in the attempt to inhibit even completely secular celebrations of Christmas, such as a string of outdoor lights.

     I won’t pretend it’s easy not to wish harm on such poison-spreaders, but it’s a Christian’s duty. All the same, the author of the above letter – apparently it’s unsigned and bears no return address – is encouraged to separate himself from the rest of us who love the cheer and good feeling of the Christmas season. He should move to a neighborhood of similarly minded others, where they can all wallow in misery as long as they like without disturbing the rest of us.

     What’s that you say? How do I know it’s a “he?” I don’t. But “he” is the generic singular pronoun: the one used when the referent’s sex is unknown or intended to be ignored. Anyone who’d like to take issue with my choice of pronouns is cordially invited to “go intercourse himself.” Yes, women too; modern appliances have made it inexpensive and convenient.

     But do have a nice day.

Dec 06 2021

The Proof Is Here

     This whole pandemic nonsense was planned:

     The time to resist is now.

Dec 06 2021

Running Scared Edition

     …or “running hard trying to scare you, Mr. and Mrs. America.”

     These days, the principal ammunition of the Left is fear. They fire barrages of it at virtually everything in sight. We’re repeatedly and stridently told to fear:

  • Racists;
  • Pro-lifers;
  • Fossil fuels;
  • Sincere Christians;
  • Large white families;
  • White identity defenders;
  • Guns (especially if they’re black);
  • Gun owners (except if they’re black);
  • Americans opposed to unisex bathrooms;
  • Americans opposed to “critical race theory;”
  • Every known variant of COVID-19 / The Kung Flu;
  • And above all else, that sinister phantasm, the “right wing.”

     I won’t speak for you, but I don’t have the time or energy for all that fear. Therefore, I tend to avoid those who promulgate it. It’s an inclusive solution, as it also spares me the attention of left-wing viragoes, scolds, and harridans. I find such…persons a constant source of vexation. They demand to know why I write about Christianity so much (because I love it), why I won’t accept the reality of “global warming” (because it’s a crock of shit), why I won’t wear a face mask (I like oxygen), why I refuse to accept The Jab (because it’s both ineffective and deleterious), and why I own so many guns (because of the Left and its mascots). Excluding them also excludes the miasma of fear they emit.

     Now, this is not an easy thing to do if you spend a lot of time on the World Wide Web. The Left has gone to great lengths to colonize all the most popular Web discussion fora. Once they’ve established a foothold there, they do their damnedest to make those fora utterly intolerant toward persons of non-Left views. The best known examples, of course, are Facebook and Twitter, but there are others of less notoriety as well. It appears that Robert Conquest’s Second Law of Politics applies to supposedly open discussion sites just as strongly as it does to other sorts of human associations.

     One consequence has been the emergence of “free speech” social media. There are a number of such sites at this time: Gab, USA.Life, MeWe, Minds, Parler, Our Freedom Book, GETTR, and others. One of the notable features common to all of them is the nearly complete absence of left-wingers from them. They don’t exclude left-liberals, progressives, socialists, communists, and what have you; persons of those views simply don’t go to them. Why?

     My thesis is that the Left can’t abide competition. If conservatives and libertarians are permitted to express themselves in Forum X, despite the Left’s attempts to shout them down, intimidate them away, or get them expelled, the Left feels disarmed – even denuded. That results in an environment in which the Left’s fear messages cannot take root.

     The result is a gaggle of sites that, because they are hospitable to persons of all convictions, virtually lack Leftist participation…whereupon the mouthpieces of the Left call them right-wing sites. Put enough of these together, add a few retailers, a video host, a cloud hub or two, and payment processors who’ll take your money regardless of your politics, and we have, in the words of Axios, a “right-wing echo chamber” or “right-wing ecology:”

     Conservatives are aggressively building their own apps, phones, cryptocurrencies and publishing houses in an attempt to circumvent what they see as an increasingly liberal internet and media ecosystem.
     Why it matters: Many of these efforts couldn’t exist without the backing of major corporate figures and billionaires who are eager to push back against things like “censorship” and “cancel culture.”…
     The bottom line: Conservative media has been a powerhouse for a long time, but this phase of its expansion isn’t just about more or louder conservative voices — it’s about building an entire conservative ecosystem.

     It is to laugh – sincerely, this time.

     The Left doesn’t like it that there are places they can’t expel us from. If we can find one another and converse like calm, civilized Americans instead of doom-shouting apocalyptics, we might stop being afraid. We might start thinking we’re not alone. So they’re trying the other arrow in their quiver: the fear arrow. They’re suggesting, none too subtly, that this emerging “right wing ecology” is in some way a threat. To whom? In what fashion? They leave that part out.

     The fears the Left promote are entirely negative. They conduce to atomization and despair. By contrast, their fear of us and our supposed “right-wing echo chamber” is a good thing. It gives rise to laughter and relaxation…and hope. May it spread wide and grow tall.

Dec 06 2021

Stylings

     One of my perennial quandaries, which rises afresh every time I complete a novel, is expressed in a simple question: “What is style?” Perhaps even more tellingly, I could ask: “Where is style?” How does it manifest itself in a story? I’ve batted this around with other writers, other avid readers, and my Newfoundlands Bruno and Rufus. (Joy is still a little young for literary analysis.) There’s no agreement on the subject. The common thread among those who believe that style is objectively real and at least potentially separable from the rest of a storyteller’s work is approximately “I know it when I see it.”

     I’m still not sure I believe in style. I don’t have one, myself – at least, not consciously. As a reader, I have my preferences, but they resist being pinned down in a fashion that would permit their use by a private eye. As a writer…?

     Quite a lot of writers are obsessed with style, and with developing a personal style that will mark a story as “theirs.” Literary prize juries tend to be concerned with style above all other things. At least, that’s the impression I get from their awards. But das Ding an Sich remains elusive.

     There’s a website that specializes in analyzing your prose style and comparing it to that of other writers. I’ve used it many times out of my desire to know what my style is. But it’s given me endlessly varying results. At various times it’s told me that I write like:

  • Agatha Christie
  • Arthur C. Clarke
  • Stephen King
  • Edgar Allan Poe
  • Anne Rice
  • David Foster Wallace

     …and other writers of note. So it appears that style is a much a mystery to the analysis engine employed by that site as it is to me.

     Where is a writer’s style expressed – and can it really be separated from the stories he tells?

***

     The late, great Florence King once spent an interval writing – girls, hold on to your boyfriends – porn. She was trying to make ends meet, always a challenge for a young writer, and at that time of her life writing porn was a relatively easy way for a writer to make a few bucks. What she discovered was that porn’s own style is infectious: it creeps into everything one writes or says. Here’s a delightful bit of King’s whimsy: a description of the eating of a soft-boiled egg as a porn writer would do it, from her novel When Sisterhood Was In Flower::

     I took the glistening, virginally white oval out of the fiercely bubbling cauldron of hot, hot, hot water and cupped my hand around it, feeling its contours with sensations of shimmering delight. I reached for my long, sturdy, battering egg knife and tapped. The shell slipped off and I touched the tender, moist, protein-swollen membranes of the secret softness. The steamy slice of hot, ready, delectable egg burned my fingers but I thrust firmly with my rigid tool and inserted the erect, serrated blade. The lubricious, golden yellow, ambrosial nectar of the pulsating, quickening core gushed out into my egg cup, I centered my mouth over the slickened surface of the gently curving silver spoon and ate, ate, ate.

     I must admit that there’s a unique and discernable quality in that paragraph – but does it apply to all porn? My limited exposure to that, ah, literary form speaks otherwise.

***

     As a reader, I’ve always been principally concerned with a writer’s overall orientation toward the fundamentals of drama: truth, justice, fortitude, love, and the ultimately tragic nature of human existence. If I find that my values march with his, I’m likely to enjoy his tales. The inverse is also true. I do become irritated by ineptitude in technical things. Most writers make mistakes, and being a grammar Nazi, I’m sensitive to them. But I’m more likely to be forgiving of such things if I like the writer’s orientation as I’ve already captured it.

     That leaves me no better off as regards the question of style and whether it can be isolated from the rest of a story. I’m still on the hunt for its elements: those aspects of a writer’s prose that delineate his style apart from his choices of plot, theme, characterization, and setting.

     I know there are a few other writers among the Gentle Readers of Liberty’s Torch. So, if you have an opinion, let’s have it here. Readers, too! If I can make sense of your thesis, it might stimulate an extended discussion that would do us both good.

Dec 05 2021

Images Of Perfection

     Good morning, Gentle Reader. Yes, I “took yesterday off.” After a fashion, anyway. I spent it finishing the first draft of my novel-under-construction, which is now in the hands of my test readers. And with that elephant off my back, I feel years…well, maybe a month or two younger. So I’m back at my op-ed perch to bore you with more of the usual crap.

     Except that this is the second Sunday of Advent, which is anything but “usual.”

***

     From the Gospel According to Luke:

     Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene, Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
     And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;
     As it is written in the book of the words of Esaias the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
     Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth;
     And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.

     [Luke 3:1-6]

     It’s a famous passage and highly appropriate for the Advent season, in which Christians of all denominations prepare to celebrate the birth of Christ in mortal flesh. But what particularly struck me this morning—not for the first time, mind you—was the portion I emphasized.

     John the Baptist was of course prophesying about Jesus, Our Lord and Redeemer. But consider the images in the emphasized portion:

  • Valleys filled;
  • Mountains made low;
  • Crooked paths straightened;
  • Rough ways smoothed.

     We don’t normally think of such things as flaws that cry out to be fixed…well, those of us who aren’t civil engineers, anyway. In all probability, most of the Jews of first-century Judea didn’t think of them much at all, unless they were headed somewhere. But John chose those as the images that would best express his intentions in proclaiming “a baptism of repentance.”

     Even on a surface level, it’s inspiring imagery – sufficiently so to have caught the eye of a certain George Friedrich Handel:

     But what would filling the valleys and lowering the mountains result in? What would we have after straightening the crooked paths and smoothing the rough places? What shapes would remain?

     The simplest shapes: the straight line and the sphere.

     John the Baptist chose those images as the foundation for “the highway of the Lord:” perfectly straight and undisturbed paths over a perfect sphere. Such a course would be the simplest and easiest to travel. To create such a course, John implied, would be a homage to the Lord, a physical expression of our worship of Him. He would surely be pleased by such a course. (Golfers would love it, too.)

     Simple and easy. Those are not adjectives that frequently apply to human lives.

     Our lives are difficult. Even if we omit the pseudo-pandemic the agents of fear and oppression have used to bend us to their will, life’s a hard and complex job. Little of it is ever simple or easy. We make a lot of mistakes. So images of straight lines and a sphere are appealing tokens of simplicity, of easy travel in which mistakes are, practically speaking, impossible.

     These are conditions we yearn for, even if we don’t believe them to be possible. They’re like the perfect love, wherein two lovers understand and accept one another wholly and absolutely, such that there can never be a misstep between them.

     Jesus, “the Alpha and Omega” of the Divine dispensation for Man, would later say something that perfectly fits the dream of simplicity and ease:

     Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

     [Matthew 11:28-30]

     And it is so. He asks little of us, far less than any other preacher who has ever liver or any creed that has ever been proclaimed. The two Great Commandments perfectly summarize His New Covenant. He brought it to the Jews of Judea at a time when the Judaic creed had become so complex that even remembering it all was beyond the great majority. That contrast was beautifully exemplified when He exhorted the “rich young man” to “keep the commandments,” and the “rich young man” replied “Which ones?”

     May your Advent season be as simple as a sphere and as easy as walking a straight, smooth path. May your Christmas be filled with the light and joy of the angels on the night when they proclaimed the birth of the King of Kings. And may God bless and keep you all.

Dec 04 2021

Brilliant video from Jimmy Dore.

Dec 04 2021

Stuffing us like a goose.

The Weather Channel is just on fire on the matter of climate change. Many entries now in the contest for “Most media hysteria generated in one week.” I was going to give this Weather Channel climate change hysteria deal a rest after my last post but now I think I may have to make it a regular feature:

12/3/21 — “Why Climate Change Causes Seas to Rise.”

12/3/21 — “How Climate Change Affects the Air We Breathe.”

12/3/21 — “What Is Climate Change?”

12/3/21 — “How Climate Change Is Making Heat Waves Worse.”

12/3/21 — “Is Climate Change Making Hurricanes Worse?”

12/3/21 — “Why Rising Temperatures Can Mean a Rise in Floodwaters.”

12/3/21 — “How Climate Change Is Making Wildfires Worse.”

12/3/21 — “What You Can Do to Help Slow Global Warming.”

12/3/21 — “How We Know Humans Are Cause of Global Warming.”

12/2/21 — “Smithsonian’s Treasures Could Be Lost.” Washington Mall built on former marshland and in an area that’s seen more than 14″ rise in the sea level in the last 100 years. Flooding becoming a problem. As sea levels continue to rise “scientists say” parts of the Mall could be completely under water. Venice on the Potomac.

12/2/21 — “Climate Change Is Killing Seabird Populations, Studies Find.” Global warming taking a terrible toll on sea birds.

12/1/21 — “Back-to-Back Landfalls To Become More Frequent, Faster.” “New study found time between [hurricane] landfalls decreasing as world warms.”

12/1/21 — “In Arctic, Rain Could Soon Be More Common than Snow.” “And that’s bad news. Here’s why.” Hint: unvaccinated pricks. No, wait! Burning rocks!

12/1/21 — “Winter Is Fastest Warming Season in Much of US.” All seasons feeling the effect of climate change but winters are warming the most.

11/26/21 — “Antarctic at Tipping Point & That’s Dangerous.” Ice sheet “may” be at a tipping point. Bad news for coastal areas across the globe. Because of warming.

This all is instructive for reasons other than how the climate change hysteria is promoted. It illustrates how a propaganda theme beloved of the political elite is pushed relentlessly in the media. Climate change is just one such issue.

Here are other familiar themes and truths pushed energetically:

  1. structural racism;
  2. white privilege;
  3. legacy of slavery;
  4. discrimination;
  5. [insert name of problem] is the fault of “capitalism;”
  6. socialism will cure all the ills of “capitalism”;
  7. women’s health is about health;
  8. all women are strong (unless they’re helpless victims);
  9. wearing vagina hats is what adult women do;
  10. single motherhood is just what we should subsidize;
  11. blacks disproportionately patronize our prisons because of white racism;
  12. this is not a white nation;
  13. notions of a stolen election are baseless;
  14. if you can call something an “insurrection” or “terrorism” the Constitution goes on an extended vacation;
  15. Epstein committed suicide;
  16. so did Vince Foster;
  17. Seth Rich’s death was a robbery that went wrong;
  18. Ashli Babbitt wasn’t murdered in cold blood;
  19. Antonin Scalia died of natural causes;
  20. Trayvon Floyd was a saint who walked the earth;
  21. Kyle Rittenhouse was a vigilante;
  22. the pandemic is deadly;
  23. no risk is acceptable but fortunately there’s no risk at all in gain-of-function virus research conducted jointly with the Peoples Liberation Army;
  24. “vaccines” will save us;
  25. alternative prophylactics, palliatives, and treatments are evil;
  26. people who mention them are eviler;
  27. the threat of “disinformation” trumps everyone’s First Amendment rights;
  28. if I read one incorrect fact I have no alternative but to embark on a homicidal rampage;
  29. no one needs to know the exact ingredients of any of the “vaccines”;
  30. the unvaccinated are a threat to us all;
  31. the [insert name] “variant” is more deadly than all the rest;
  32. it’s possible to mandate that employees accept experimental gene therapy but impossible to require employers to participate in e-Verify;
  33. adverse gene therapy reactions are minuscule (sorry about your kid);
  34. deficits are meaningless;
  35. debt is meaningless;
  36. it makes perfect sense for the central bank to pursue policies that destroy 50% of our savings every 36 years;
  37. the Social Security trust fund is safe and secure;
  38. government officials care about you and the country;
  39. American factories should be shipped to China by the tens of thousands;
  40. million-dollar payoffs to the president’s son by Ukraine and China have no hidden quid pro quo and involve no ethical problems;
  41. it’s normal for a U.S. Secretary of State to have her official email traffic routed through a server in her home bathroom;
  42. the Soviet/Chinese/Cambodian terror never existed;
  43. masculinity is toxic;
  44. Trump is crass (doesn’t follow the script);
  45. the federal government can do whatever it wants so long as something floated across a state line sometime somewhere in the last 25 years;
  46. there are emanations from the penumbra of my German shepherd;
  47. Russia is evil;
  48. Russia is hell bent on expansionism;
  49. Putin’s a thug;
  50. America has the God-given right to determine what government every nation on the planet should have because Exceptional Nation;
  51. Assad likes to bomb and gas his own people;
  52. the U.S. can wage aggressive war against Syria and not violate the U.N. charter or the Constitution;
  53. it is right and proper for the U.S. to steal oil from Syria and impose stiff sanctions on it;
  54. open borders are a blessing;
  55. multiculturalism is too;
  56. we’re a propositional nation with a living Constitution;
  57. interracial marriage is the new ideal;
  58. this is absolute, positively not a once functioning white nation that was completely destroyed by mass immigration;
  59. it’s impossible to deport foreign invaders and citizens demand they must instead be offered a “path to citizenship” and provided with health care and welfare;
  60. the United States is the true home of all people on earth;
  61. globalism will solve all our problems created by the poison of progressivism;
  62. homosexuality is normal and is to be promoted and celebrated;
  63. Americans demand that media personalities be cretins, clowns, and liars;
  64. Americans agree that the ultimate dream of the Founders and Ratifiers was for the United States to be ruled by billionaires, bankers, and unaccountable media monopolists;
  65. it’s perfectly normal to have black radicals and AntiFa filth roam our streets and burn and loot without without interference from the police;
  66. people can change their sex like the channel on the TV; and
  67. Muslims are a perfect fit in every Christian nation.

There are others.

Was there ever in the history of man another time where there was such a massive effort to dictate such a grotesquely deformed elite version of how to handle the smallest details of life, even including our innermost thoughts? Or where the ruling elite depended on blatant censorship and violent street thugs to enforce its dictates?

Admittedly, this my usual litany of cosas terribles but I challenge any and all to say it’s not something sorta kinda like an outline of our dying, lunatic nation. We no longer live in anything close to normal times and we should be aware of the toxic soup of propaganda in which we live. Alas, sooner or later the Cosmic Surgeon is going to look at the full accounting of our stupidities and crimes and say “Surgery is scheduled for tomorrow and it ain’t optional.” That would be the “won’t go on” part of Herb Stein’s genius observation. That things that can’t go on won’t.

Dec 03 2021

Well, Well! What Do We Have Here?

     I’ve been having a lot of “What’s the use?” days lately. For the reasons, start with the Glenn Beck video below, add a few issues of a personal character, and stir briskly. And then, every so often someone adds an olive:

     Augustin Garcia, 63, was arrested thrice last week for stealing a 12-pack Coors Light beer from a Bronx bodega, robbing two Manhattan straphangers–wielding a knife at one of them, Your Content reported.

     The alleged crime spree started around Nov. 21 around 7:30 p.m. when he swiped a dozen cans of beer from a bodega in the Bronx. He was charged with petty larceny and released without bail. On Nov. 22 at around 3:00 a.m., Garcia was back at it–he allegedly robbed a woman at knifepoint at the Canal Street station and asked her to “stay back” when she pursued him, Latin Times reported.

     Manhattan prosecutors demanded Garcia be held without bail for his crimes but the judge denied it. Following this, he again snatched another woman’s iPhone at the Lenox Street station. All three arrests occurred in a span of 36 hours, the report stated.

     Garcia allegedly boasted to NYPD (New York Police Department) officials that he would be released again because he didn’t have any prior convictions. However, he was charged with felony robbery this time.

     The accused was sent to Bellevue Hospital for a psych evaluation following his third arrest. Prosecutors spoke in favor of Garcia being held $20,000 cash bail or a $60,000 bail bond but their plea was again turned down by Manhattan Criminal Court Judge Valentina Morales.

     This supposedly mentally ill man called the turn accurately: he was released again. Why?

     There are several potential explanations. All of them might be parts of the answer. But the part of this episode that strikes me most powerfully is the hand-wringing over our inability to check the recent crime wave. It made me throw my hands up and scream “What the hell did you expect?” at 4:25 AM Eastern Standard Time.

     It is not possible to thwart crime when criminals are aware that the “forces of order” won’t act against them. Even the ones who are arrested and charged are usually released to ply their trades afresh. But this is now the sotto voce policy of American law enforcement. All too frequently, the excuse is “mental illness.”

     I could go into a long ramble about the utter insanity of using “mental illness” as a shield against incarceration. I could tell you about insane triple murderer Robert Irwin, or the equally insane “Boston Strangler” Albert DeSalvo, or other killers who were spared prosecution on mental illness grounds. At least those two were eventually confined for the rest of their lives. Many others have walked free, “compassionately” released to prey on us again.

     Today, of course, you don’t even need to be “mentally ill” to get away with any crime on the books. Just be part of a “mostly peaceful protest.” Indictment? Bail? Excuse me while I get control of my laughter.

     Ralph Waldo Emerson is whispering in my ear again:

     If the government is cruel, the governor’s life is not safe. If you tax too high, the revenue will yield nothing. If you make the criminal code sanguinary, juries will fail to convict. If the law is too mild, private vengeance comes in.

     Indeed. But soft! What news is this?

     The Senate Thursday evening passed the stopgap funding bill to avert a government shutdown.

     The Senate voted 69-28 to pass the interim bill that will fund the government until February 18.

     Is “averting a government shutdown” one of your imperative priorities, Gentle Reader?

     I thought not.

***

     The following essay first appeared at Liberty’s Torch V1.0, on October 2, 2013:

“Gentlemen, you see that in the anarchy in which we live, society manages much as before. Take care, if our disputes last too long, that the people do not come to think that they can very easily do without us.” – Benjamin Franklin, to the Constitutional Convention of 1787

The so called “government shutdown,” which the Obamunists and their hangers-on claim will “blow up the economy,” along with miscellaneous other horrors to be inflicted on the poor, Negroes, children, women, homosexuals, grandmothers, the snail darter, the Delta smelt, and the spotted owl, has now been in effect for a little more than a full day. My neighborhood is just as it was before. New York State is lumbering along in its usual quadriplegic fashion. The stock markets appear to be taking it calmly. No one has invaded us. So why all the fuss?

Because of the Benjamin Franklin quote above, of course.

The Ruling Elite is far more threatened by the shutdown than any other sector of society. Granted, some of us, myself among them, might need new jobs if it were to go on indefinitely, assuming private enterprise doesn’t pick up where the Pentagon leaves off. But we have skills…well, most of us, anyway…that can easily be transferred to other applications than killing people and breaking things. But what about politicians and bureaucrats? Except for the ones that hold credentials of other kinds, what would they do to stay in coffee and cakes?

Bureaucrats are persons who read and write memoranda. That’s a skill made valuable solely by government; therefore, once government is gone, there will be no niche for them. Except for the ones that pack guns, of course, but I’m sure the private sector can deal with them…one way or another. However, I can’t think of any portion of the private economy that has a grinding need for officious, self-important bastards consumed by a lust for power but are incapable of anything but vilifying one another. Can you, Gentle Reader?

Franklin’s caution to the Constitutional Conventioners might yet be realized in this year of Our Lord 2013. Whether he would look upon today’s developments with alarm or satisfaction, I cannot say.

***

The late Samuel Francis is probably best known for his conception of anarcho-tyranny:

What we have in this country today, then, is both anarchy (the failure of the state to enforce the laws) and, at the same time, tyranny – the enforcement of laws by the state for oppressive purposes; the criminalization of the law-abiding and innocent through exorbitant taxation, bureaucratic regulation, the invasion of privacy, and the engineering of social institutions, such as the family and local schools; the imposition of thought control through “sensitivity training” and multiculturalist curricula, “hate crime” laws, gun-control laws that punish or disarm otherwise law-abiding citizens but have no impact on violent criminals who get guns illegally, and a vast labyrinth of other measures. In a word, anarcho-tyranny….

The laws that are enforced are either those that extend or entrench the power of the state and its allies and internal elites … or else they are the laws that directly punish those recalcitrant and “pathological” elements in society who insist on behaving according to traditional norms – people who do not like to pay taxes, wear seat belts, or deliver their children to the mind-bending therapists who run the public schools; or the people who own and keep firearms, display or even wear the Confederate flag, put up Christmas trees, spank their children, and quote the Constitution or the Bible – not to mention dissident political figures who actually run for office and try to do something about mass immigration by Third World populations.

This crossbreed between the tyranny made possible by an overweening political power and the chaos too many persons have associated mentally with “anarchy” strikes the superficial as impossible. Governments exist, they argue, to enforce order; therefore, while they can tyrannize, to attribute chaos to them, simultaneously at least, is misconceived. What the superficial manage to miss is that while a government can “enforce order,” it need not do so for everyone. Indeed, the history of governments is without any examples of a government that enforced a truly uniform order, in which the same laws have applied to everyone regardless of his identity, his occupation, his wealth, or his station in society.

Go ahead. Check me on it. Then come back and read the rest.

***

“Government is an association of men who do violence to the rest of us.” — Leo Tolstoy

“I was never molested by any person but those who represented the State.” — Henry David Thoreau

I have come to agree with the late Mr. Francis on nearly everything he thought, said, or wrote. Moreover, the “red thread” that runs through every significant malady of American society, both the ones he cited in the quotes above and any others you might care to name, is that of government. Governments at all levels are the creators and perpetuators of the disorder, the poverty, the social tensions, the suppression of enterprise, and the seemingly irremediable failures of core institutions that plague these United States.

Note that any government in operation is solely an instrument of violence. Governments are distinguished from other organizations in that within the zone of their sovereignty, they are indemnified, de jure or de facto, against penalty for doing what a private individual or organization would be prosecuted for. This privilege frees governments from having to do anything but coerce the rest of us.

Sometimes, such coercions have no imaginable purpose but the assertion of the privilege of coercion itself:

Fifty-seven year old Texas homeowner William Keith Hall shot “a career criminal” who broke into his home on September 26 and was subsequently shot by police after refusing to drop his gun once they arrived.

In fact, Police say he pointed his gun at them when they reached the scene.

According Fox News, 30-year old Jerry Wayne Hale broke into Hall’s home and was shot. Thereafter Hall allegedly pointed his gun at the man who called 911 and then allegedly pointed at witnesses who were near Hale.

The 911 caller said Hall actually tried to “fire at the witnesses but his gun apparently jammed.”

Fox News carried a report from The Dallas Morning News saying the police did not realize Hall had shot Hale in defense of his home when they arrived. Therefore, when Hall refused to drop his gun–and even “pointed the pistol at police officers,” according to Maj. Jeff Cotner–police opened fire.

Hall died with Hale at the scene.

Decide for yourself whether to believe the self-exculpating claims of the police who gunned down a homeowner in his own home.

***

“The State represents violence in a concentrated and organized form. The individual has a soul, but as the State is a soulless machine, it can never be weaned from the violence to which it owes its very existence.” — Mohandas K. Gandhi

We may have happened upon a stroke of good fortune. Owing to the most recent developments in Congress, we have an opportunity to observe, while the federal government is (partially) closed down, whether conditions will deteriorate or improve.

Even if nothing were to change except for the removal of government — if “society manages much as before” — I would count it as a massive improvement. We would have shed the dead load of government, which coerces, mulcts, and hobbles us in so many ways. That alone would open possibilities governments have repeatedly obstructed.

In writing the above, I am mindful that no change so sweeping would come without cost. In particular, we are not our colonial ancestors, accustomed to looking after ourselves and one another without the “help” of the State. There would be a period during which many addicted to government payments would be at the mercy of their neighbors. There would be a period during which criminals — “private-sector” criminals, that is — would perceive increased opportunities for plunder. And there would be a period during which the other nations of the world would have to defend their own borders…hopefully, a period never to end.

But human beings adapt. At least, we do so once we’ve been convinced that it’s adapt-or-die, and that there’s no way back to the swaddling comforts of the past. And really, what did our colonial forebears have that we don’t, except for Tyrant George across the Atlantic to rebel against?

Give it some thought.

     I maintain that the highest priority of our political class is keeping private-citizen Americans from realizing that we do not need them. And I maintain further that given their utter uselessness in checking the riots, the vandalism, the mass looting, the organized smash-and-grabs, or any other current ill, no more need be said.

***

     Nothing lasts forever. Everything is unstable. Protons are unstable, for Pete’s sake! Why should we have expected that our Republic would last forever? Where was the evidence for such a notion?

     It was pure wishful thinking, just as was the conceit that given its Constitutional foundation, the federal government was “a machine that would go of itself.”

     We have reached the terminus of the American Republic. The corpse may shamble along for a while, but its animating essence has departed. What remains is to determine what comes next.

     Some years ago, I wrote a novel about an experiment in anarchism. It was tested by an ecological crisis. I contrived a temporary salvation for it…but even after that magnificent sacrifice, Hope’s anarchism could not last forever. Its people had become too used to their world “going of itself.” They grew fat. Some became envious of others – destructively so. And so the very family which produced the indispensable hero who saved Hope’s ecological benevolence also produced its very first government, as I chronicled in the second and third books of the trilogy.

     Nevertheless, Hope’s people had twelve centuries of freedom. Granted, they had to start from scratch on a world with none of the supports of a modern civilization…but that was one of the reasons why they remained free for so long! They were too busy scratching a living from the soil to bother about robbing and oppressing one another.

     The state as we know it was born in exactly that fashion. Read Franz Oppenheimer. Read Albert Jay Nock. Consider the many points of comparison between the state and a criminal band, as the late Murray Rothbard exhorted us to do. Then ask yourself what should come next.

***

     I can’t close without mentioning an intriguing article, brought to my attention by Kenny “Wirecutter” Lane. It’s fairly long, but worth your time. For my current purposes, a snippet will suffice:

     The inalienable rights of man recognized in America’s Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights are the best modern example of a political system based on natural law. The rights to individual “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” come from the Judeo-Christian beliefs that under God all men are created equal, that we have free will to choose between good and evil, and that human beings have the freedom and responsibility to govern our own lives and society. The Constitution guaranteed the rights of free speech, free press, freedom of religion, and the right to personal property. These rights must constantly be reinforced and supported by the notion that government actions should not impinge on them, because they are sacred.

     The article’s author contends that the Republican Party could and should adopt that philosophy as its party ideology. We’re kindred souls, he and I, but what was viable two and a half centuries ago won’t fly as a political banner today.

     Reasons? You want reasons? Haven’t you read what came before this point? Oh well. Try these reasons:

     First, politicians love power far too much to embrace an ideology that explicitly denies them all but a tiny amount of power. Also, a politician with so little power has nothing to sell to favor-seekers with fat wallets. How, then, would our $200,000-a-year Congressmen ever become multimillionaires, as they believe is their right?

     Second, “Natural Law Liberalism” comes up against an important facet of human nature: As Thomas Szasz put it, freedom is that which you demand for yourself but would deny to others. Under an NLL regime, everyone would have the maximum degree of freedom possible in a human society! How, then, would my neighbor punish me for letting my dogs out at 4:00 AM? And how would I punish him for not mowing his lawn for six weeks straight?

     So this freedom under natural law stuff will never play in Canarsie. Not as long as we insist upon empowering a government, electing power-seekers to it, and allowing them to legislate and regulate…and not as long as we are as lazy, as quarrelsome, as envious, and as grasping as we have become.

***

     The verdict is in: the Republic is dead and cannot be resuscitated. We the People are too fat, too divided, and too envious to construct a new one on wholesome principles that accord with natural law. Perhaps we should test old Ben Franklin’s fear that “we” can manage without “them.”

     There are alternatives. In Franklin’s day, the most plausible one was simply for the thirteen colonies to remain “free and independent states.” There was also the beckoning Western frontier, and there were some who pushed on in that direction, whether to separate themselves from the burgeoning of politics or merely for the adventure of it. There was also Franklin’s own Albany Plan, though that notion, which explicitly kept the colonies united to the British Crown, received very short shrift from the other Framers.

     There are always alternatives. Perhaps we’ll choose several, in competition with one another as the states of Europe did for centuries before their recent attack of political psychosis. One way another, we will go…one way or another.

     I could go on. Be grateful that I’m stopping here. And do have a nice day.

Dec 02 2021

This Man Speaks For Me

     I’ve admired Glenn Beck ever since his days on “Headline News.” After viewing the video below, I admire him even more. I’ll bet, after you’ve watched it, you’ll say he speaks for you too:

     Does he?

Dec 02 2021

The Price Of Admission

     Most “exclusive” groups have a membership test: a specific course of action the applicant must fulfill to qualify for admission. Often, within such a group there exists an inner circle with even more demanding requirements for entry. In each case, the advantages that accrue to the member will be proportional to the severity of the test he must undergo. (Accordingly, a group with no explicit requirements for membership will confer no substantial advantages upon its members.)

     Some of the violent gangs that have blighted America have had as a membership test that the applicant must commit a murder in the presence of other gang members. By doing so, the applicant is said to “make his bones.” The gang assures itself of the applicant’s loyalty in this manner, for he would literally have to stake his life that in exchange for his testimony, the authorities would overlook his capital crime.

     Now let’s talk about abortion.

     The Left has striven to raise abortion to sacred status: as untouchable a political issue as Social Security. Pro-abortion activists have gone so far as to hold “shout your abortion” rallies, at which they exhort women who’ve had abortions to celebrate them publicly. However, an enormous number of Americans are still staunchly pro-life, while an equal number are disgusted by the contemporary use of abortion as post hoc contraception. Recently, the most extreme pro-abortion advocates, who want it to be a legally protected act from the instant of conception all the way up to the instant of birth, have found themselves fighting a rearguard action against the swelling of the aforementioned groups. There’s a lot of money involved, especially on the pro-abortion side.

     Abortion is a “non-negotiable” within the Democrat Party. Democrats who are even mildly uneasy about unrestricted abortion are not to be found among the party’s leaders. Indeed, they’re rare among the rank and file. If you’ve ever expressed a qualm about abortion, you’ll find it impossible to win admission to the party’s inner circle, where the money, power, and prestige are concentrated.

     One way to “make your bones” to the Democrat leadership is to have an abortion and speak of it proudly and publicly. It might not be strictly necessary, but as a token of commitment it’s valued highly. The reason, of course, is that thereafter the other leaders have “got something” on the applicant that she would have a hard time backing away from. Even among the Democrat rank and file, proclaiming your abortion openly can gain you acceptance and enhanced status.

     That’s not a complete explanation for behavior such as this:

     Outside of the Supreme Court on Wednesday, pro-abortion protesters allegedly ingested abortion pills as the court prepared to hear arguments over a case from Mississippi that could dramatically alter abortion in the United States.

     As reported by Fox News, “At least four women were seen taking pills as others cheered. The group Shout Your Abortion did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment on the video and protest.”

     According to a Twitter post with video by feminist writer Erin Matson on Wednesday, “people took abortion pills outside the Supreme Court!”

     …but it goes a long way toward making it comprehensible.

     Stephen Kruiser comments on the “creepiness” of it:

     Abortion — that most contentious of all issues — is front and center in a way that it hasn’t been since the abominable Roe v Wade decision was handed down in early 1973. American lefties are melting down over the fact that their ability to kill babies in the womb with impunity might — heavy on the might — be restricted a bit. They’re so twisted they act as if the very survival of the species depends on the ability to commit infanticide….

     The joyful celebration of the termination of innocent life is something that sane, decent people can’t wrap their heads around. It isn’t just that the American left has lost their minds when it comes to abortion, it’s that they’ve lost their humanity.

     I pray that some of them get it back.

     If we see it as a membership test, it becomes more comprehensible. Someone determined to gain entry to the circles in which abortion is deemed sacrosanct is likely to behave this way. The attraction is increased if other advantages might also come from it. (Of the readiness of horny young men to cheer on such women and their “right,” it is unnecessary to speak.)

     (A side note: Quite a number of the most extreme pro-abortion advocates have made the claim that we who are pro-life merely don’t want women to have sex. It’s absurd, of course. Given the efficacy and ease of modern contraceptive methods, no one could logically claim that without unrestricted abortion, sex would be too risky to indulge. But the Left has found linking abortion to sexual freedom to be a winning approach, even though it’s utterly false.)

     Abortion is the most durable of all “cleavage issues” that separate Left and Right. No other issue commands its level of passion or commitment. Mississippi’s new law banning abortion after 15 weeks of gestation, which is now before the Supreme Court, will raise the emotions, the accusations and counter-accusations, and the stakes to unprecedented heights, greater even than those that pertained at the time of Roe v. Wade. Therefore, expect the Left to beat its loudest drums, and to instruct those who’ve “shouted their abortions” that once they’ve “made their bones,” there’s no going back.

     Yet there is “going back.” Catholics know it well. It’s called absolution. And it’s available to anyone who sincerely repents. Verbum sat sapienti.

Dec 02 2021

More Weather Channel climate hysteria.

12/1/21 — “Western Mountains Could Soon See Years of No-Snow Winters, New Study Says.” California could be hit in the late 2040s. Low- or no-snow winters by 2050. Warmer waters in the Pacific lead to less snow in winter storms. Snow pack last year at its peak was down 41% and California’s wet season is getting shorter. MAJOR implications for California’s water supply. The study is here. The crystal ball predicts no snow in approx. 35-60 years because of anthropogenic climate change, a new “no-snow” definition, annnndd model predictions. Look out endangered species.

But, this article is one of 20 articles on “snow” at Watts Up With That?: “Remember, The British MET Called the End of Snow Last December.” By Eric Worrall, Watts Up With That?, c. 3/21. Apparently people in the “no snow” corner think that actual observations that contradict computer models can be dismissed as due to “black box ‘natural variation.’” I’m not sure what “black box” means but it think it’s something like “magic” or “deus ex machina.” E.g., from the article: volcanic eruptions shielded the earth or “the oceans swallowed the missing heat.” Ergo, go with the models.

11/29/21 — “More Damaging Hurricanes Could Be Coming for Northeast, Study Finds.” Warmer temps and YKWIMAITYD. And 35,000 computer-generated storms . . . . QED.

11/23/21 — “Study: Extreme Heat Exposure in Cities Has Tripled.” 300 deg. F?! Cities hotter due to people, pavement, and, yup, greenhouse gases. Recent assessment by IPCC — intense heat waves becoming more common. Needed: better heat action plans. Extreme heat kills more people annually in the U.S. than any other weather. Get it? Greenhouse gases –> warming –> heat increase –> death.

11/23/21 — “Armadillos Roaming New Territory Thanks to Climate Change.” Habitat alteration and climate change likely causes.

11/19/21 — “Thousands of Giant Sequoias Killed in Wildfires.” Fires sparked by lightning and — you guessed it! — “with climate change making droughts worse and fires more intense the worst may yet be to come.”

11/18/21 — “Drone Captures Devastation in British Columbia.” Since drought in California is intensifying due to climate change (see above) the Weather Channel can’t bring itself to blame the flooding just up the road in Canada on climate change so the flooding has cut off access to Canada’s largest port in Vancouver “and that is disrupting the global supply chains which are already reeling, as we know, from the pandemic.”

11/16/21 — “COP26 Climate Summit Ends with Coal Compromise.” “Environmental activists say the deal that calls for a reduction in coal power [“the soft dance on coal”] will make avoiding the worst effects of climate change a lot harder.”

11/12/21 — “The U.K.’s First Climate Change Refugees are from Fairbourne, Wales. But Some Refuse to Leave.” “In north Wales, residents in the small coastal village of Fairbourne face being the U.K.’s first ‘climate refugees.’ Authorities say that by 2054, it would no longer be sustainable to keep up flood defenses there because of faster sea level rises and more frequent and extreme storms caused by climate change.” Four-inch rise in the last 100 years but predicted (by the IPCC) “to rise to 1 meter” by 2100. So 10 cm. in 100 years and an additional (?) 90 cm. in 79 years. Or 0.1 cm./yr. v. 1.1 cm./yr. or 11 times faster rise between now and 2100 than in the previous 100 years. Some kinda global warming climate change. Because CO2.

11/12/21 — “Island in Chesapeake Bay Could Soon Become Uninhabitable. Seas are rising so fast on Virginia’s Tangier Island, researchers say residents may soon be forced to flee.” May become uninhabitable wetlands as early as 2051.Rising sea only a local phenomenon. “Just one of many islands in Chesapeake Bay being engulfed by water as the world warms.” Question: Does the sea level rise only in certain parts of the ocean or is this island really just barely sticking out of the water? Note to self: check elevation of island. (Clock ticks.) Oh, it’s 3 feet.

11/11/21 — “The River Thames Has Been Invaded by Venomous Sharks, and Ecologists Are Thrilled.” The river’s been cleaned up so the increased life is good but . . . “The Thames isn’t completely in the clear. It still faces rising temperatures and water levels because of climate change.”

Dec 01 2021

Timing Is Everything

     We’ve had enough politics and current events for now. Let’s talk fiction.

     If you undertake to write suspense or thriller fiction, you will come to grips with the problem of timing: in your staging of the conflicts, in your characterizations of the antagonists, and above all in the selection and narration of events as the story approaches its climax. That sort of fiction depends more greatly upon good timing than any other variety.

     There’s no Procrustean formula for making timing decisions, though there is a useful guideline: Don’t keep the reader waiting pointlessly. Once you’ve introduced events and characters that make it possible for the reader to sense that the climax is drawing near, it becomes important not to create new side trails or to linger in those that you’ve already inserted. Also, the closer you come to the big event, the faster you must tell the story. Once the reader has the scent, he’s going to want to run, not walk toward it.

     Some writers are famous for their skill at handling fictional timing. Stephen King is notably good at it. His novels Pet Sematary and Needful Things are practically tutorials in how it’s done. By contrast, Tom Clancy often had problems getting the timing right. An example is his novel The Sum of All Fears, where Clancy’s desire to prolong the build-up overcame his narrative sense. Well, we all have our strengths and weaknesses.

     Care in handling timing is principally a consideration at novel-length. It seldom raises its head in short stories, though a “long” story – i.e., a novelette or novella – will sometimes present timing decisions. My original fantasy novelette “The Warm Lands,” which became the opening segment of the novel of the same name, faced me with a timing decision I originally flubbed. An editor who critiqued it called me on it and showed me how to fix it.

     Be aware that your timing decisions will be disputed no matter how carefully you address them. They engender more dissent among readers than most other auctorial choices. Just because you think you got it right doesn’t mean all of them will agree. This is especially likely when your book has one foot in a genre with characteristic, quasi-mandatory patterns running through it. Sometimes one of those patterns will clash with the timing appropriate to your climax.

     For example, my romance novel Antiquities had critical timing requirements, owing to its culminating events and its position in the larger Onteora Canon. I got very mixed feedback about those decisions. A fair number of readers were so deeply absorbed by the romantic-musical plot thread that they completely rejected the climactic events. The most common rebuke I received from them was that “it shortened the story.” Well, yes, it did, but death is like that.

     I’m grappling with timing questions now. The novel-under-construction, which is in essence a romance, embeds an ugly conflict whose resolution dominates the second half of the story. My awareness that the climax is gradually coming into view is compelling me to narrate faster and faster. The need has forced me to review and re-review the book from end to end, out of my worries that I haven’t quite got it right. Of course, the reader will be the ultimate judge.

     What tales have you read where the author’s timing decisions struck you as particularly important – whether or not you think they were made appropriately? When you’d finished it, were you satisfied by how the author timed the story? Discuss!

Nov 30 2021

Club Membership Uber Alles!

     If you have any memory of the Brett Kavanaugh hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee a few years back, you might remember this:

     To me, the most important snippet of Senator Graham’s tirade is when he points to the Democrats on the committee and says “These have been my friends.” It’s a massively revealing statement, and massively relevant to many events that have occurred since that time.

***

     It hardly needs to be said that the corrupt, power-obsessed Democrats recognize no priority above that of getting their way. From that perspective, it can legitimately be said that they have no friends, as we would use the term. Friends don’t sacrifice one another in a quest for power over others. As the Kavanaugh hearings made plain, the much-ballyhooed “collegiality” of the Senate means nothing of substance to them.

     Now, it can be argued that there are similarly corrupt and power-obsessed Republicans, and I’m sure that’s true. But when we seek the reasons for overall Republican spinelessness, sometimes amounting to passive collaboration, in the face of Democrat aggression, there’s another motivation to be addressed that might weigh more heavily still. It brings us back to that “collegiality” business, and not in a pleasant way.

     Commenting on the themes and motifs in his novel Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, British espionage writer “John le Carre” (his real name is David Cornwall) spoke of the “member of my club” effect. That is, a high-ranking member of Britain’s intelligence service would automatically reject an accusation of treason lodged against another high-ranking member, because both are part of an elite: “It can’t be! Not a member of my club!” The elevated social circle that encloses both persons protects either against suspicion by the other.

     The “member of my club” effect reaches much further than that, especially among persons in government service. It weakens Republicans’ opposition to Democrat initiatives by gentling their objections to such things. After all, one wouldn’t want to give offense to “a member of my club.”

     Democrats feel no such reluctance, but that hardly need be said.

***

     Today, Brock Townsend points at a disturbing set of relationships:

     The Ghislaine Maxwell trial is underway, and there is breaking news that is sure to play a role in how the trial plays out.

     The latest shocking piece of information is the identity of one of the prosecutors.

     Maurene Comey, the daughter of former FBI director James Comey, has been named one of the lead prosecutors in the case against Maxwell.

     Many are already crying foul over this news, especially after hearing that the judge in the trial, US District Judge Alison J. Nathan, was recently nominated by Joe Biden to a higher office in the US 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals.

     (More extensive coverage of these matters can be found here.)

     Some commentators have already cited this as an example of the Deep State at work, and that is so. But within the Deep State there are higher and lower circles of privilege. The circle that unites the players named above is high indeed. Whether or not Maurene Comey and Alison Nathan have already pledged to protect Miss Maxwell (along with the reputations of any of her associates who might be named during the trial), we cannot know. Nevertheless, their common “club membership” is alarming enough without considering the possibility of corruption. Is objective justice something we can reasonably expect under such circumstances?

     It’s been said that we should not assume malice as an explanation when stupidity would suffice. These days, I have my doubts about that guideline. But a similar sort of preference-in-ordering might apply to controversies where common “club membership” can be plainly seen.

Nov 30 2021

The Deep State – Afghan Style

More evidence of the perniciousness of permitting the opposition to tunnel into your institutions.

It’s not sufficient to defeat the partisan/ideological enemy at the ballot box; we ALSO have to root them out of our institutions. One more argument for reduction of the permanent government.

Load more