A Brief Guide To Human Action – Which Leads To Human Freedom

“They say you’re a man of vision.  Is that true?” – Lonesome Dove

I’ll never forget Pa Wilder’s last words:  “Find a woman that holds you as tight as Nancy Pelosi holds a vodka bottle.”

(John Wilder note:  Please read this post all the way through because I think you’ll find this one of the most useful posts that I’ve put together.)

Ludwig Von Mises is was an economist.  His pronouns are dead/buried.  The sure sign of the best economists is that they’re dead, because then they can’t ask to be paid for being wrong all of the time.

One thing that Von Mises left us with was a book called Human Action.  Really, it wasn’t a book, it was him sitting at his typewriter and generating a 400-page doorstop like he was getting paid by the punctuation mark.  I read some of it back in my more libertarian days.  Dry doesn’t begin to describe it – after completing two hundred pages you become as desiccated as King Tut’s armpit.

Thankfully, the main ideas of Human Action are quite powerful and also pretty simple.  And, it won’t take me 400 pages to get to the point.  Von Mises created a model of human action where he states that each and every voluntary human action requires three things:

A Vision Of A Better State:  For example, me having a beer.  If it was Friday, I might consider that having a beer would be a better state than not having a beer.  In most cases, the vision is based not on cold, logical thought, but on emotion.

A Path To Get To A Better State:  It just so happens that there’s a beer in the fridge, so if I got my sorry butt off of the couch, I could walk over and get one.

A Belief That Action Will Really Lead To A Better State:  I really and honestly believe that I could walk to the fridge and get a beer, since I deactivated the trap door that leads to the alligator pit.

How many economists does it take to fix a lightbulb?  Don’t know, they’re still arguing over why the last one broke.

In my example, I started off with a Vision first.  That’s one way that action can occur, but not the only way.  The three necessary conditions can really come in any order.  I might have a pile of lumber and a saw and a hammer.  So, I have a Path.  I have Belief that I could build something out of wood since I’m okay at building stuff out of wood (just okay, not great).  After thinking about it, I decide to build a PEZ® dispenser sized for PEZ© the size of cinder blocks with an articulated carved Anne Coulter head so her jaw can open as wide as a python’s.  In this example, my Vision of a better state (and need for a really big spring) came last.

I’ve found when analyzing the actions I personally take, a truism:  if all three of the Human Action requirements are met – Vision, Path, and Belief – then my action is guaranteed.  Likewise, if even one of them is missing, nothing (and I mean nothing) happens.

This model is useful to use when people that you’re working with aren’t doing what you want them to.  Analyze the situation:  which of the three elements of the Human Action model are missing?

People in business have been using this model on you for as long as you have lived.  Think of a typical car commercial:

  • Vision: Buy a Mustang® so hot chicks in bikinis will like me and want to pat my bald head.  See!  They’re patting the bald head of that man on the commercial!
  • Path: Go to the dealer and buy one, they have tons of them.
  • Belief: Hey, zero percent financing and no credit check.  They’re giving the money away so I can buy one!

All commercials are based on manipulating these three simple elements.  Commercials are attempting to get us to take action – or to avoid taking an action.  Most are trying to get our money, but some are trying to convince us that Steven Tyler from Aerosmith© personally cares whether or not we drive drunk.

Steven Tyler just released two books.  One’s a cookbook, and the other’s an art book:  “Wok This Way” and “Doodles Like A Lady”

Manipulation is the key to this game.  Understanding when you watch a commercial how they’re trying to change our views allows us to be on guard against that manipulation.  And, as I noted before, it is a very rare commercial that wants to appeal to logic.

Emotional manipulation is where the money is at.  The advertisers want us to use their gasoline and love it because, um, it’s more gasoline-y than the competitors?  Because it has special molecules in the gasoline that make gravy in your pistons?  Regardless, look for the emotional manipulation – it will be there.

So, we’ve saved a few bucks because we’ve kept the advertisers out of our heads.  Hurrah!  But who else is using this model?

Well, Big Government, for one.  On January 6, 2021, all the Congresscritters had at least a bit of pee in their pants.  A group of relatively aimless protestors stopped off at the Capitol to share their opinions with their elected representatives.

I was on a witness stand at a trial in Alaska, and the lawyer asked me, “Where were you on the night of November to March?”

The group’s Vision was murky.  “Walk over and complain” might be a good description.  It was certainly more peaceful than most of the George Floyd riots (and more on them in a minute).  The Path was easy – it’s not even a very far walk from their rally to the Capitol Building.  Did they have Belief that their action would allow them to “walk over and complain”?

Sure.  So they did.

But that’s not what the Congress Swamp Rats saw.  They saw a group that, with a slightly different Vision could have easily started a movement that would have ousted our current government via a revolution.  As every reader here knows (and as every Congressional Parasite knows), the rank and file of the Right are the single largest army the world has ever seen.  Even if the Right was pitiful, it could take over forty (?) state governments in 24 hours.

We are truly governed only by our consent.  Seizing power in America would be trivial if people on the Right had a Vision, a Path, and Belief that didn’t include a government more intrusive than if Google® was a proctologist and more bloated than 1977 Elvis.

That’s exactly what happened when the Berlin Wall fell.  The people suddenly had a Vision:  sexy American girls in bikinis, CD players, and not having to drive crappy commie cars anymore.  They had a Path:  tear down that Wall.  Once they had Belief?  The Wall didn’t last an afternoon.

As another Floyd, Pink Floyd© tried to metaphorically tell us, The Wall is built in our mind, brick by brick.

Communism is the noble struggle of the proletariat to overcome the problems that are only caused by communism.

Anyone who thinks the “assault” weapon grab has anything to do with “mass shooting” has bought the emotional propaganda that Big Government (along with Big Business and Big Media) is selling.  Big Government wants the guns off of the street because they are the only real threat that Big Government sees to itself and the privileges that it has given itself.

That’s why the George Floyd riots were so important to Big Government.  What were the protesters protesting for?  More Big Government, more handouts, and more government control – this time not only of our rifles that are rarely used to shoot anyone (484 people a year in the United States for all rifles, compared to 1,476 for knives and other pointy things), but also our speech, our national heritage, and even our thoughts.

The BLM riots weren’t stopped because they’re everything Big Government wants.

I started carrying a pistol after a mugging attempt.  Now my muggings are more successful.

The biggest trick the Devil tries is to convince you he isn’t real.  The biggest trick that Big Government tries is to convince you that you have no power.  But if we have no power, why are there more troops in Washington D.C. than in Afghanistan?  Big Government has set the Right as the enemy.  I assure you, they are more afraid of the 80,000,000+ people on the Right than they are of the Chinese.

Now that you know their intentions, what else is Big Government, Big Media, and Big Business trying to make citizens feel?

Does this change your Vision, Path, and Belief?

Blinded By Science: But Are We Wiser?

“Well, once again, my friend, we find that science is a two-headed beast. One head is nice, it gives us aspirin and other modern conveniences. But the other head of science is bad. Oh, beware the other head of science, Arthur. It bites.” – The Tick

It sucks being the youngest clone – all your genes are hand-me-downs.

One of the things that I am really fascinated about is the limit of human knowledge.

Imagine, only a few decades ago:

  • We had no proof that there were planets around distant stars,
  • We had no idea that Neanderthal DNA was a part of modern humans, and
  • We thought Jimmy Kimmel was funny.

As time goes on, human knowledge keeps increasing. We learn a lot more, well, stuff. That’s not to say that we’re any the wiser.

A typical adult male on a homestead in 1880 could understand nearly any device on his farm. Beyond that, he could fix many of them. My Great-Grandpa McWilder was an example of just that. He had a shop that smelled of oil, wood, and leather. The tools were, by today’s standard, ancient.

Grandpa McWilder’s power drill was cordless – that meant it was a drill bit in a chuck that was hand-cranked. The power to run it entirely off of McWilder power. The faster Grandpa cranked the handle and the harder he pushed the drill bit into the wood, the faster it would drill.

What’s my favorite drill dance? DeWalts®.

There was a certain intimacy with the wood that kind of drill gives, that’s lacking with a power drill. Of course I noticed that when I was drilling into the trim around the door, and the floor, and the workbench.

When I had complained that I didn’t have a suitcase to visit Grandpa (as a five-year-old would), he took an old suitcase that he had in the closet and gave it to me. “This doesn’t have a handle,” I complained. Within twenty minutes, Great-Grandpa had selected an old leather belt and braided it into a handle that still graces that suitcase today.

Life was simpler then.

Now, not one person in a thousand could explain how an old tube television works. The Internet we use today? Very few people understand even the basics of how it works.

And yet, we’re bombarded on all sides with information about things we should passionately care about, even though we don’t understand them even a little bit. Net Neutrality? Sure, a blog written by someone from Netflix® or Comcast™ tells you, “Hey, care about this.”

In reality? Network Neutrality is a fight between billion-dollar companies about who gets the spoils of our Internet and streaming fees. If that were our only knowledge problem, well, that’s something we could easily conquer, I mean, if we cared.

But it’s not the only thing we don’t understand.

The very fundamental parts of the Universe we live in are still quite a puzzle.

Step off the Trump Train, and onto the No-Fly List.

General Relativity is one of the most successful theories in the history of science. When Relativity predicts something, often our observations prove that Relativity is correct to as close as we can measure. Without Relativity, we couldn’t explain why Mercury orbits like it does. GPS would be impossible without making relativistic corrections. And, good heavens, how would I ever convert matter into energy in my kitchen?

Quantum Mechanics (QM) is similarly successful. Every time we make a measurement based on this theory, it’s also as close to theory as our instruments can measure. Lasers and transistors depend on Quantum Mechanics – they are well explained by that theory.

But both theories can’t be correct. And we have no idea why. Scale Relativity down to the QM world? Nothing makes sense. Scale QM to the Relativity world?

It doesn’t work, either. So, our two best theories in physics don’t really mesh.

Women are like an open book, but it’s about Quantum Mechanics and it’s written in Chinese.

There’s a gulf there in human knowledge. Sure, you don’t have to know how beams and columns work in order to build a house – otherwise we would have lived in caves until 1700 or so. But we just have no idea how two theories that interact to form the cutting edge of technology could ever be compatible.

So, there’s that. Okay, physics is messy. Surely biology is better, I mean, we can dissect pandas and giant turtles to see how they tick.

Sadly, biology is a lot messier, and that’s even before you carve the panda into steaks. Richard Nixon declared a “War on Cancer” back in the 1970’s, and cancer appears to be just as successful as the Viet Cong. It’s winning. Sure, we’re better at fighting it, but I’ve read about a dozen “silver bullet” cures for cancer over the last decade.

Biology is much worse than physics, because we can’t do proper experiments. I’ve made the point in conversations with friends that if we conducted controlled experiments on people with cancer and let the researchers have immunity from prosecution (on pesky Nuremberg-level crimes) for five years to a decade? We’d have real silver bullet cures for cancer.

But even outside of my war-crimes-level thought experiment, biology is a basket case compared to physics. Biology can’t explain some really, really basic things, like why I should care what a woman thinks.

Or, like DNA.

DNA is the most miraculous (word choice consciously made) molecule ever. DNA information density is far beyond anything humans have created. 0.141 ounces of DNA (four of some communist unit called a “gram”) could hold all of the information all of human activity from ancient Egypt to 2011, including the useless information like what The Mrs. asked me to get at the store.

Four grams = two zettabytes of data, Marty!

I tried to mix killer whale DNA with human DNA. What did I get? Banned for life from Seaworld®.

The idea that biology professors try to support is: DNA is the result of an accident in slimy pools at the beginning of the Earth.

DNA is the greatest level of information density in the known Universe. Heck, DNA represents the greatest level of information density conceivable in our world today. It’s just a coincidence that it’s able to be read and written by squishy cells in squishy people.

An accident.

Sure. Anyone who believes that probably voted (D) all the way down the ballot in the last election. Some of those people, presumably, were even alive.

But that’s not a question scientists can approach today (either elections or the origin of DNA). A big problem with science today is that it is just a larger, more grey-haired version of Twitter®. The questions before science aren’t small:

  • Don’t believe in Global Warming®? Heavens! Heretic! Cancel them! Even little Swedish girls know better.
  • Think that Dark Matter is more properly spelled Dubious Matter? Is Dark Matter the physics equivalent of bloodletting and leeches?
  • Why aren’t we seeing or hearing aliens? Is it because they didn’t pay their cell bill? Did they block us because we made T.?
  • Why do we sleep? I mean, not me, because I blog. But why do humans have to sleep?
  • How are space, time, and gravity connected? Heck, we don’t even know how dementia, the Presidency, stairs, and gravity are connected.

Biden tried to get off of stairs, but it was a multi-step program.

In the first paragraph, I noted that we’ve learned a lot of things recently that would have been incomprehensible to people 100 years ago. And I stand by that. But here’s the paradox:

Even as we’ve learned so much, science is currently broken, and hopelessly politicized. The vast sums of money and decades required to run experiments that will give us a glimmer of the next revelation of science require that the scientists who design and run the experiments are from the orthodoxy.

To be a part of orthodox science means you have to ignore inconvenient facts. There are entire fields of study that cannot be researched because people might have their feelings hurt. Actual people who claim to be scientists say that there is no difference between men and women.

In 2021, you have to be politically correct, and heaven help you if the Woke Left doesn’t like your shirt choice. Remember that poor guy who wore a silly Hawaiian shirt? You know, the guy who just helped land the Rosetta probe on a comet in frigging space in 2014? In 2021 they’d have just taken and immediately burned him at the stake, live on Facebook™.

See, there’s an answer to every difficult question.

Guilty admission: I really did email the guy and asked to buy the shirt. I figured it was at least worth a shot.

As we advance in science, it seems we learn more and more about less and less. Yet, as we’ve learned more we’ve created a world that’s increasingly alienating to the individual through a haze of increasingly impenetrable technology. Perhaps the future of the human race is a VCR clock, flash 12:00PM endlessly?

The world has also become increasingly hostile to simple variations in individual behavior that fall out of the current norms. In the case of people like Abraham Lincoln or Dr. Seuss, they can be charged and found guilty in the court of public opinion because the ideas of 100 years ago or 160 years ago don’t agree with today’s ideas.

That’s okay. I still have the suitcase that Grandpa McWilder fixed for me. The handle he made from the leather belt is still doing its duty, better than anything made today.

Bonus: Here’s the pattern on the material that the guy’s shirt was made from:

The Left’s War On Truth

“I’ve heard the truth, Mulder. Now what I want are the answers.” – The X-Files

Wow.  It’s like some of these might be made up.

The first enemy of the Left isn’t the Right.

The first enemy of the Left is the Truth.

The examples go back through history, starting with the Leftist takeover in France after the French Revolution.  In order to completely cut ties with the past, the Left even changed:

  • The names of the months: the Revolutionaries changed all of them, though they kept 12 months.  The coolest name was Therimidor which was, roughly, July.  I’ll give them that one:  Thermidor sounds like a place you keep wine.  I don’t know much about wine, but I do know you have to keep it hot.
  • Weeks went from 7 days to 10 days. Why?  Metric weeks!  They even had special names for the day, but they were all in French and looked like they might cause inadvertent strangulation if I tried to pronounce them.
  • The day went to ten hours. Each metric hour had 100 metric minutes.  Take that, Babylonians!
  • The units of measure. All standards of mass, energy, temperature, and length had to be changed.  Why do I call the metric system communist?  Because it started with the commies.  Did Stalin know how tall he was in feet and inches?  Nope, he was all metric, comrade.

Truth is the enemy of the Left, and the idea was (and is) to destroy history.  This is the reason the statues have to come down in city after city – they represent a Truth that the Left can’t control.  Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves?  His statue has to go.  He didn’t do enough.

Abe doesn’t go to plays anymore.  That last one blew his mind.

This Leftist hatred of the Truth might explain two stories that are recently in the news.

The first one is the reaction of the United States military versus Tucker Carlson.  Tucker Carlson:  Is he a legitimate military target, perhaps more dangerous than Russia?  More dangerous than China?

Well, no.

Mr. Carlson made a 10-minute segment where he criticized the President * for changing the military for political reasons.  The changes?  Most were tied to the feminization of the military.

Carlson made the point that the military’s job is winning wars.  Having pregnant female pilots probably (in Carlson’s estimation) didn’t make sense after President * made a comment about “maternity flight suits” in his address.

I hear this pilot’s husband complained that she worked too hard.  “Well, somebody’s gotta fetus.”

The response, from military personnel, in uniform consisted of a Marine sergeant who said, “. . . those decisions were made by medical professionals, by commanders, and our civilian leadership . . . .” and followed up with, “ . . . let’s remember that those opinions were made by an individual that has never served a day in his life . . . .”

I’m wondering what would have happened to a Marine in uniform attacking someone on the Left on social media?  Oh, wait, Marine sergeant Gary Stein was kicked out with an “other than honorable” discharge for criticizing Obama.  Sure – Tucker Carlson isn’t the Commander-In-Chief, but this is a political attack while in uniform.

John Kirby, Pentagon Press Secretary:  “(The United States Armed Forces) . . . won’t take advice from a talk show host or the Chinese military.”

But would the United States Armed Forces take advice from the Marines?

I hope I don’t give her low elf esteem.

In 2015, the Marines did a $35,000,000 (that’s a lot of crayons) study about integrating women into combat groups.  A pretty decent summary is here on the Marine Corps Times (LINK).  I’ll publish a few snippets from the article that highlight findings of the study (All bullet points are direct quotes from the Marine Corps Times):

  • All-male squads and teams outperformed those that included women on 69 percent of the 134 ground combat tasks evaluated.
  • All-male teams were outperformed by mixed-gender teams on two tasks: accuracy in firing the 50-caliber machine gun in traditional rifleman units and the same skill in provisional units. Researchers did not know why gender-mixed teams did better on these skills, but said the advantage did not persist when the teams continued on to movement-under-load exercises.
  • All-male squads in every infantry job were faster than mixed-gender squads in each tactical movement evaluated. The differences between the teams were most pronounced in crew-served weapons teams. Those teams had to carry weapons and ammunition in addition to their individual combat loads.
  • Male-only rifleman squads were more accurate than gender-integrated counterparts on each individual weapons system, including the M4 carbine, the M27 infantry automatic rifle and the M203 grenade launcher.
  • Male Marines with no formal infantry training outperformed infantry-trained women on each weapons system, at levels ranging from 11 to 16 percentage points.

Shockingly, women are different than men, the study found (All bullet points are direct quotes from the Marine Corps Times):

  • In anaerobic power and capacity, female Marines averaged 15 percent lower levels than their male counterparts. In anaerobic power performance, the top 25 percent of female performers and the bottom 25 percent of male performers overlapped.
  • In aerobic capacity, female Marines demonstrated levels 10 percent lower on average than male Marines.
  • Over the course of the assessment, musculoskeletal injury rates totaled 40.5 percent for women, more than double the 18.8 percent rate for men.

The Marines declare war on Tucker Carlson?

To the Left, Tucker Carlson is evil incarnate – Tucker is questioning one of the Sacred Points of Liberalism – Reality Is What We Say It Is.  That cannot go unpunished.  Personally, I know one former Air Force officer who is female who probably could have done any specialty she wanted to in the Air Force.  She is so far off the charts by multiple standard deviations on intellect and physical ability so as to be not comparable to average in any way.

She has contributed more to the national defense than I ever will – and she’s still doing it.  But the outliers don’t prove the average.

Women can serve, and can serve meaningfully, but they have physical limitations so significant that the Marines in 2015 said that combat infantry wasn’t an option if your goal was killing people and blowing up things.  An average college varsity swimmer can beat every woman’s swimming record – world record.  The woman’s record for deadlifting is 683 pounds – that’s quite a lot.  The men’s record?  1,104.5 pounds, nearly double.

Who says guns aren’t sexy?

No, we’re not deadlifting our opponents to beat them in combat, but strength, speed, and quickness mean something to the Marines or else P.T. would consist of couch time and nachos for lunch.  I’d think physical fitness mattered for people engaged in combat.

The Marine study agreed:  the top 25% of women overlapped with the bottom 25% of men in physical ability.  Also, in sheer competence, the all-male Marines clearly won 70% of all combat exercises.  Though I can’t find the quote, I do recall reading that several female participants in the study were quoted as being of the opinion that females shouldn’t be in combat after seeing the results.

What’s most frightening to me is that the military has come together to attack Carlson.  For the military to attack a civilian in the news media over an opinion that is political in nature is unsupportable.  It’s the next step to the United States Military becoming involved in domestic politics.  Oh, wait, there are troops in the Capitol and permanent fencing going up to keep citizens out?  Nevermind.

Ooops.  Looks like someone reads Twitter®?

The second news item might not originally seem related, but I assure you it is.  The last week has seen the growth of a new orientation:  Super Straight.

Super Straight has its origin in transgender ideology.  You see, if you are a male that doesn’t want to date a “trans woman” the trans community would call you a “transphobe” because, in their world, “trans women are women.”

Well, Super Straight was an amazing troll of this philosophy.  It was actually the brainchild of a 16-year-old on TikToc®.  He was lamenting that he would be called a “transphobe” for not liking “trans girls” so he came out . . . as Super Straight.  That meant that he was only attracted to women who were born as women.

The group noted they felt being called “cis-male” or “cis-female” was hate speech.  Orange and black are the SuperStraight colors.

In 2021 the idea that a biological male might want to only date biological females is being sold to kids as odd.  But even kids can see this is nonsense.  That’s why they’re revolting.  They were using the same language that the Left uses back at them, “Why can’t you stop attacking me for this?  I was born this way.”

And the Left must stop that – the idea that “normal” can defend itself is not acceptable.

The Left has to portray themselves as the undisputed victim class.  They are the ones that are horribly abused.  They are the ones that are deserving of pity because society oppresses them.  The idea that another group might take this from them?

Worse than death.  The Left agrees.

Remember,  trains is hard job.

So, the plug was pulled on the Reddit® forum r/SuperStraight after just over a week – despite the fact that over 25,000 people had joined it that quickly.  Or was it because that many people joined it that quickly?

Ironically, it wasn’t long before SuperLesbians started showing up.  They were creeped out by transwomen wanting to date them and calling them transphobes if they said no.  Also?  SuperGays showed up.  They didn’t want to date transmen.  It was a strange, weird, and amazingly polite group of people who didn’t want to be forced to date people who are (let’s be clear) more than a little creepy.

Is it a crime to notice?

I don’t dislike trans people – I don’t know any of them.  There just aren’t that many in the world.  There might be 0.1% to 0.3% based on a 2014 study.  Many of them have other underlying psychological issues:  their suicide rate is 20 times their peer group after surgery.  Based on everything I’ve read, they are a group that deserves sympathy and psychological help.

The trans movement is probably the biggest finger in the eye of Truth that the Left has pushed so far.  The idea that a 10-year-old kid can make decisions that would lead to them being put on very potent hormones with far-reaching implications to block puberty is frightening.

But the Left will support that with everything they have:  when Rand Paul questioned Dr. Levine about giving kids powerful hormones and conducting surgery on them during confirmation hearings, all Dr. Levine would say is, “Transgender medicine is a very complex and nuanced field with robust research and standards of care . . . .”

See, even the sign language interpreter isn’t buying it.

So, yes.  Levine supports it.  The Left agrees.  And mainstream news was, unsurprisingly ready to complain that Rand Paul didn’t understand medicine.  Dr. Rand Paul, M.D.

It erases our past.  It erases our norms.  It erases the current structure of society.  This is the same exact playbook as the military.  The military ceases to be about protecting the country, it becomes an arm of the political Left, erasing hundreds of years of tradition and purpose.

You realize this is next, right?

That’s why the SuperStraight movement made me smile.  It was founded by kids who see the lie.  They know they are being lied to.  They know the people who are lying, know they are telling lies.  This is the best element of hope:  Truth matters.

The Truth will win.

The Great Purge Ahead

“When a forest grows too wild, a purging fire is inevitable and natural.” – Batman Begins

Stalin was better than most magicians.  He really made people disappear.

The Soviet Great Purge started in 1936.  Stalin already had a bad reputation as a Dictator who couldn’t say no – he had gotten rid of millions already in the Holodomor (In The World Murder Olympics, Communists Take Gold And Silver!).  The Great Purge was different.  The piles and piles of earlier dead had been peasants and kulaks (kulaks were peasants that had enough money to own a cow), mainly.   Even before the Great Purge Stalin had the world record for Russian killing, a record he still proudly maintains.

By 1936 Stalin, always paranoid, decided his main opponents were, surprise, still Russians.

Anyone who had been a trusted advisor of Lenin had to go.  Anyone who looked like a threat to Stalin?  Had to go.  The Red Army had troops with guns.  Three out of five Soviet Marshalls were executed.  13 out of 15 army commanders, 50 out of 57 corps-level commanders, and 154 out of 186 division commanders were caught up in it.

The very top of the Soviet Military was decapitated.  But that was a small portion of the Great Purge.  In the end, probably a million or more were murdered or died in the Gulags.  Anyone in politics was fair game, and the more power the bigger the target on their back.  Many of the people who helped Stalin with the Great Purge eventually were victims of it themselves.

What did Jack Nicholson say to his dentist?  “You can’t handle the tooth.”

What was the basis of the Great Purge?  Even though Stalin binged and purged, it wasn’t bulimia, it was Power.  Stalin wanted to keep power.  His greatest weapon?

Fear.

And fear is currently the weapon (predictably) used by the Left today.  They want to push people to the fringes, isolate them, and then purge them.  The first step is making them feel alone.

Of course, there haven’t been executions in the United States.  However, Obama purged 197 high-level officers in the first five years of his administration.  That’s quite close to the Stalin numbers, and perhaps even greater when you consider that the military in 2000s America is far smaller than in late 1930s Russia.

The purge has lately increased.  The current SecDef has made it clear:  “The job of the Department of Defense is to keep America safe from our enemies, but we can’t do that if some of those enemies lie within our own ranks.”

Just let that sink in.  The current Secretary of Defense has stated that he thinks that the biggest enemies of the United States are in the military, right now.  Today.  The leadership of the military has already been purged.  Now?  The rank and file is in the process of being purged.  Anyone not actively supporting the Leftist agenda will be drummed out.

If you need sink jokes, I’m at your disposal.

They want to purge anyone who is involved in “extremism” from the military.  As far as commies, I certainly agree.  But extremism for a Leftist is mere disagreement with a Leftist.  Don’t agree that having a 9-year-old boy dance as a girl in front of gay men at a strip club is entirely good and appropriate?

Extremist!  Behavior that would have resulted in imprisonment for the mother in all but the last 10 years since 1787 is now considered so sacred that it is impossible to challenge.  Now, speaking out against it is extremist.

Hollywood® is already on the job with this requirement.  Star Wars® was a part of my childhood.  I saved money when I was 12 to buy overpriced dolls action figures.  The mythos of Star Wars© was always one of Good versus Evil, which burned itself into my young imagination.

Now?  It’s Leftism versus the Right.  At every opportunity, the creative element at DisneyLucasFilmStarWars™ has abandoned the production of good movies to produce movies that are water carriers for the narratives of a Leftist agenda.

I grew up loving Star Wars©.  It was fun.  It was escapism.  It was a place where there were good heroes and evil villains.  Okay, I’ll admit, the entire series should have ended when the Emperor© said, “And now you die, young Skywalker™” during Return of the Jedi©.

Luke was late because he had to take an R2-Detour.

The latest is that an actress got fired for expressing mildly Right viewpoints.  Heck, they weren’t even something that 95% of every American wouldn’t have agreed with when Kurt Cobain was still sucking air instead of pushing daisies.

And that is the technique of the Left.  If they can’t directly imprison you, they do their best to turn you into an unemployed, destitute outcast of society.

Imagine 50,000 Leftists watching everything you re-Tweet® to catch you.

But, thanks to me, you can watch the purge unfold in real time.  The Long March through the institutions of the United States is ongoing.  Here’s the current status of the things the Left owns:

  • The K-12 educational system.
  • Colleges and Universities.
  • Most Protestant religious organizations.
  • Most Catholic organizations.
  • The psychological establishment.
  • The American Medical Association.
  • All mainstream news media.
  • All mainstream entertainment media.
  • Most departments of the Federal government, absent the armed services.
  • The general officer corps of the armed services.
  • The courts.
  • Silicon Valley tech companies.
  • Many (but not all) Most Fortune® 500™ companies.

The result in 2021 is that of the institutions of the United States, the Left has or is consolidating control over nearly all of the important ones.  What remains?  Junior officer and enlisted men in the armed forces (at least for the next few months) and the governors and legislators of a few states.

Oh, and at least 80,000,000 inconvenient people.

The idea is to scare Americans about the Purge, to scare them about their place in society.  If the State and the Media can scare Americans like that, they can achieve their ultimate goal:  to make them be quiet.

One of the greatest compliments I’ve had from a friend about this website was this, “If they (the powers that be) were really reading and understanding the things you say, you’d be much, much higher on The List.”

The Mrs. prefers the elevator, I prefer stairs.  I guess we were raised differently.

The reason I don’t feel fear is this:  I’m not alone.  As I said earlier, there are 80,000,000 other inconvenient people on the list.

Standing together?  We can’t be canceled.

Standing together?  We can’t be purged.

Standing together?  We can’t lose.

This isn’t over.  We’re not done.

GameStop: The Tip Of The Corruption Iceberg

“And pruned the hedges of many small villages.” – Three Amigos

Amazing what happens when you find the world is corrupt . . . .

GameStop®.

In a world filled with COVID-19 shutdowns and Internet sites where you can download nearly any game ever made for low prices, it seemed like a sure thing that GameStop™ would fail. Except . . . people liked going. The profits weren’t through the roof, and the business model was older. Heck, the last time I was in a GameStop™ was over eight years ago, and about half the shelf space was pop-culture memorabilia and nerd toys, not games.

Never mess with weaponized autism.

Seeing this, the Wizards of Wall Street® decided to “short” GameStop™. I’ll explain what that is, and I promise you my analogy will be far funnier than what CNN© does unintentionally – and that’s a high bar.

Let’s pretend that you and I are friends. You brought the latest Pac-Man© cartridge game. Since you trust me, you lend it to me.

Addled on Monster™ Energy Drink© and chicken tendies, I waddle down to the local GameStop©. Since there is a relative shortage of Pac-Man™, GameStop™ offers me $50 for the cartridge. I pocket it and go home.

Two months later, you sober up and remember I borrowed your vidya game, and ask for it back. I waddle my greasy fingers down to GameStop© and buy a used cartridge. It’s not the original one that you lent me, sure, but you’ll never know the difference, not with your hygiene.

Since Atari© has made a metric buttload of additional Pac-Man© cartridges, the price to buy a used version is now $30. I buy it. I give it back to you. I pocket the $20, and no one is the wiser.

Last week was like no other . . .

That’s a short sale. I borrowed a commodity – one Pac-Man© video game cartridge (minor wear and tear excluded) is functionally exactly the same as any other Pac-Man™ cartridge.

That’s (sort of) what the hedge funds were trying to do with the shares of GameStop©, but with one crucial difference: the price went up. And they sold more shares of GameStop™ than exist.

That can happen in two ways. The first is legal. If I owned 100 shares of GameStop©, my broker could loan them to someone going short. They’re selling legal, actual shares. I might really, really, like GameStop™, so maybe I buy 100 more.

My account says that I have 200 shares of GameStop© now. I think I have 200 shares of GameStop™, but in reality, my broker only has 100. The same thing happens in a fractional reserve bank (like your bank) in that if you put $100 in, the bank might loan it all out. You think you have $100, but that $100 was loaned to someone. Just like shorting a stock, it sounds illegal, but it’s not.

So how does that work with my previous analogy?

Ahh, in a perfect world.

It’s exactly the same. If the price of Pac-Man© goes from $50 to $30, then I make $20. But if there’s a fire at the Pac-Man© cartridge plant in Roswell, New Mexico (because they use alien slave-labor from Arcturus to make them), and the price goes up to $100?

I’m out $50. But how often do the Arcturans revolt? Not often.

So, we’ve seen how my little deal could go wrong. But how wrong could it get? Infinitely wrong. Let’s say that I do this with 1000 Pac-Man© games, since it’s a sure thing. So, GameStop© gives me $50,000. Now I just sit and wait.

Yup, the hedgies lost billions.

But the fire thing happens. And since everyone else sold all of their friend’s Pac-Man© games before the factory caught fire, the price goes up. Way up. Like up twenty times in price. Let’s see, 20 times $50 is . . . $1,000 a copy. So now, since I borrowed that $50,000 in hopes of making $20,000 when the price went down, I’m actually in really bad shape.

I owe 1000 games times $1,000 dollars. I owe my friends, collectively, $1,000,000.

Ooops.

Musk is no fan of short sellers since they tried to destroy Tesla® a few years ago.

This is what the hedge funds did. And since (I believe) some of them are what is known as a “market-maker” they have 21 days to come up with those games (shares). 21 days is forever, so don’t worry about those billionaires – most of them are still billionaires – they just will have to wait until next month to buy that second volcano island death lair.

This is the situation that the Reddit© group r/wallstreetbets found – GameStop© was horribly oversold by hedge funds, and just a few people buying could start pushing the price up.

At one point, one of the r/wallstreetbets early investors in the short squeeze was up $48,000,000. That’s not a typo.

With a short, there’s a lot of power as the price goes up. The Hedge Fund Leech that runs the hedge fund starts to get nervous, and adds to the buying pressure as he tries to buy stocks to “cover his short.” This actually increases the price, sometimes causing it to go upward. A lot upward.

If that was all that happened, it would have been an amusing story. Wall Street Leeches get one-upped by message-board posters. Ha ha!

Something wonderful about that, right?

But that’s not all that happened. Immediately, the news media, (some) trading houses (most notably Robinhood©) and the talking heads began talking about how this was bad. The people who normally distort the economy and screw over the middle class don’t really like it when the weapons that they use are used against them.

Google®? Not on your side.

Well, actually none of them are on your side.

Huh. And they invest big dollars for that privilege. How much money have they given Janet Yellen, Secretary of the Treasury? A lot.

Whose side is Joltin’ Janet on? Not yours.

Last week on Thursday and Friday the powers that be told the markets to “shut down” the Internet Freedom Party raid on the financial leaches. In fact, several articles extolled how the Hedge Fund Leeches were the real heroes.

I’m feeling so sorry for him!

It’s a big game, but you and I are not supposed to play. You’re supposed to buy shares in your 401K so the Hedge Fund Leeches can take your money and collude with each other to own the economy. The free market is, in principle, a great thing. People buy and sell. The market allows the prices to be shared by all.

Well, I used to be the guy in front.

But Monday? Someone spent a quarter billion dollars to depress GameStop©. It’s analyzed here (thanks to r/wallstreetbets):

Also, people forget this: there were Hedge Funds on the other side of the deal. Vampires don’t need prices to go down, they can also make money when prices are going up.

Who knew that Karen ran the SEC?

No. Big players distort prices, they sell and buy options to make money on stocks that they intend to dump for short term profits after manipulating the markets. That this financial vampirism actually destroys companies, jobs, and communities?

And they will call you anything to make a buck.

Who cares? Not the Wall Street Hedge Leeches. Here’s Tucker Carlson with a discussion about one Wall Street Hedge Leach destroying an entire town in Nebraska. For a few million bucks. They would do that to you, your family, and everyone you know for a 2% return.

If you’re not mad, you’re not paying attention.

None of this is financial advice, you hosers. So, take off, eh. All of the memes are “as found” on the Internet.

Health, Media, And Distrust

“That’s because there’s no logical reason Vitamin C would cure polio.” – House, M.D.

What’s worse than misplacing your keys?  Polio.

I really don’t have to tell you how deep the distrust in society is today.  In many cases, it is for good and heckin’ valid reasons.  That will be the theme for the next three posts, starting with today’s post.

Media distrust is at all-time highs in the United States.  There’s an old Soviet joke about their newspapers, Pravda (which means “Truth” in English) and Izvestia (which means “The News” in English):

“There’s no truth in Pravda and no news in Izvestia.”

Especially in 2020 and (now) in 2021, our news has been so corrupted as to make Stalin jealous.  Sadly, this has consequences.

I’ll start off by stating the obvious:  COVID-19 is a real disease.  There have been fatalities.  If you read Aesop’s blog (LINK), you can get a firsthand account of his dealing with it as a medical professional.  It isn’t pleasant reading, but it is truth, and when it comes to COVID-19, I trust Aesop more than the CDC.  Also?  I’d rather read the unpleasant truth than pretty little lies, any day.

Editor:  “I want that fable on my desk, AESOP!”

It also isn’t pleasant when he comes over to this place and (validly) punches me in the mouth with all of the subtlety of a Devil Dog storming a German trench when I get my medical stuff wrong.  I actually appreciate that since I want the truth to get out, regardless of ideological consequence.  (Though sometimes it stings.  And I’m sure he’ll remind me to get the shingles vaccine when I get older.)

But yet . . . Dr. Anthony Fauci said this on March 8, 2020:

“There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And, often, there are unintended consequences — people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face.”

Remember, no matter how useless you think you are, there’s always Dr. Fauci.

On April 3, 2020, Fauci changed his story:

On masks, he said, “If everybody does that, we’re each protecting each other.”

Fair enough, people change their minds, right?  But it later came out that the context of the first statement was built on a lie:  “ . . . masks were not recommended for the general public, as authorities were trying to prevent a mask shortage for health workers . . . .”

How hard is it to say . . . “We don’t know.  Masks might work.  But right now there’s a shortage and we’re asking you to save those masks that are available for health workers”?

It’s not hard.  And it’s honest.  When they lie to you, that tells you what they think of you.

Now, Fauci recently (January 2021) said that maybe you should wear two masks.  In his case that makes sense – one for each of his faces.

I can now tell if a person has a mustache even if they have a mask on.  I guess I’m hairivoyant.

Now we end up with the COVID-19 vaccine.

To be clear:  I’m not an anti-vaxxer.  My kids have all of their shots – that’s why they get the tag from the vet.

What, the tags are for the dogs?

Oops.  No wonder Pugsley tries to keep hiding his collar and bell and rabies tag under his t-shirt when he goes to school.

Additionally, there is clear evidence that some vaccines have done some significant amounts of good:

  • Smallpox has been eradicated – like my jokes, it’s a killer. But smallpox is like one of my obscure jokes – no one gets it anymore.
  • Polio? What’s that?
  • Others: Measles and mumps were (for a time) eradicated in the United States, though the number of lives saved annually due to measles might be as low as 400 a year due to the vaccine (LINK) and may be half that or less.  Also?  The biggest decline in measles deaths took place years before the vaccine was released.

Oh, wait, I guess I just asked.

But let’s go back to polio.  While the vaccine was new, one batch had polio that wasn’t “killed” and it infected hundreds of thousands of kids.  Another version was contaminated with SV-40, a virus from monkeys (it was a relic of how the vaccine was produced) that produces cancer in some lab critters.  SV-40 DNA has been found in various cancers in humans, including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, though it’s considered controversial to say that the polio vaccine triggered those cancers.

Was it worth it to get rid of polio?

I can sit back in 2021 and easily say, “Sure, those aren’t my kids.”  A few parents from 1954 might want to have words with me, though.

Now, the current vaccine is of a type that’s entirely new.  It uses strands of RNA (biological spaghetti that transfers information on how your squishy parts are made) to trigger an immune response by making your immune system sensitive to proteins that are a part of the ‘Rona.

A good idea?  Sure!

A good idea to try on the fly with millions of people in a science experiment?

Hmmm, now I’m not so sure.

Would I want Pugsley to get the vaccine?  At his current age, there is a 0% chance of death if he catches the ‘Rona.  Most likely, he’d never even know he had it.  If I expand his age group to include the few unhealthy kids in their 20s that caught it and died, the chances of death, if he got it, is 0.001%.  For him, driving to school is far, far, more dangerous.

Would I want my son to take a vaccine of an entirely new type when the chances of side effects killing him are by definition equal to (zero is equal to) or greater than his current risk profile from the WuFlu?

Probably not.

What isn’t helping is that discussion of any subject related to COVID-19 is censored on YouTube® if it doesn’t say exactly what Dr. Fauci thinks.  And, as we have established, what he says is demonstrably not guaranteed to be the truth. It might be, but we already know one thing:  the man will lie to us.

Did Hank Aaron die as a result of the Coronavirus vaccine he so publicly took?

I have no idea.

Who would I trust to tell me yes or no, that the vaccine is safe?

I have no idea.

There’s even a toll in California for tying your shoe.  Knot fare.

The radio spouted a daily COVID-19 death toll until the minute Joe Biden was sworn in.  Now?  Not at all.  The only stories I hear now are (mainly) positive vaccine stories.

I just wish we had more Pravda in our Izvestia.

End Censorship Of The Right With This One Simple Trick

“This is the worst kind of discrimination. The kind against me.” – Futurama

Twitter® Safety Council Warning:  This meme has disinformation – this was not crack, Hunter Biden was smoking meth.

I get worried when I see Internet personalities come up with entirely new philosophical positions.  I generally roll my eyes and ignore them.  I can recall reading details of a few “master systems” that could never work unless they were implemented by a group of autistic libertarians on a planet with infinite resources, free fusion power and access to unlimited deodorant.

Oh, wait, I just described Switzerland.

History shows, though, that one “master system” created by a group of guys actually worked. This is, of course, the United States.  The United States was a 2.0 version – the original 1.0 Articles of Confederation apparently needed an upgrade to function.  (There are those who say the 1.0 version was working just fine, but that’s another story.)

There are several safeguards built into the Constitution.  Some of them appear to not work very well anymore, like the Supreme Court, which went on the fritz somewhere around 1932.  Some changes (like the direct election of Senators) are like a fuse in a 1982 Buickâ„¢ Skylark© – the fuse has blown but been replaced by someone sticking a penny in the slot.  The Senate doesn’t really do what it was designed to do, anymore.

What kind of cancer was Jar Jar diagnosed with?  Meesathelioma.

One remaining safeguard is Federalism.  Federalism is the idea that the individual States aren’t simply a subdivision like a county or city, but are individually sovereign.

This is a really big deal.

The States have given up several of their rights by joining the Union, but certainly not all of them.  One particular right that the several States retain is to protect the civil liberties of their citizens.  It is perfectly legal for any State to protect its individual citizens from discrimination, especially discrimination by businesses.

My suggestion is this:  since the Right controls a large number of States, and a large number of important States, why not use that power for the Right?

Here’s one suggestion:

States controlled by the Right should protect their citizens from discrimination based on their legal opinions – political or otherwise.  We could start out with something simple, like making discrimination on social media illegal.

Okay, that’s not really simple.  But it is something that we can do.

If the French army used Twitter, all you’d hear from them is “Retweet, retweet!”

Here is my contention:  large social media companies in a world where opinions are increasingly driven by them aren’t a privilege, they’re a right.  And being excluded from them can swing elections.  Uganda certainly thought so:  they banned Twitter® and Facebook™ because (according to the Ugandan ruling party) they were taking sides in the election.

Yes, you got that right:  Ugandan despots have a higher moral ground than Twitter® does.

Twitter©, in an unintended bit of irony, complained that censorship was wrong.  Wait, Twitter™ said censoring Twitter® was wrong.   Twitter© is, of course, fine with censoring the accounts of American citizens who have opinions that Twitter™ doesn’t like.

Here’s what Twitter© said:

“Access to information and freedom of expression, including the public conversation on Twitter, is never more important than during democratic processes, particularly elections.”

In Soviet Russia, the vote hacks you!

Care to take a bet that Twitter®, Amazon™, Facebook©, and Google® didn’t influence the election in the United States?  Think that Twitter™, which has zero competition, hasn’t unduly influenced the “democratic processes” in the United States by choosing what information to promote?

Well, let’s make all of them live up to Twitter’s© words and guarantee access to information and freedom of expression.  How about we make a law that says:

  • Any discrimination by censoring users with legal opinions is punishable by a $1,000,000 fine. Per occurrence.  Every censored user could split the fine halvsies with the State.  If I were to be particularly evil, I would suggest that this be done via administrative law, which takes it right out of the court system.  They could only appeal to, for instance, the Texas Social Media Freedom Commission, where they’d learn that messing with Texans is a bad idea.
  • Censoring porn? Just fine, since it’s not appropriate or legal for every user to see.  Censoring, real, actionable threats?  Those are already illegal.  So that’s fine.
  • Can an individual block other users that offend them?   But no large social media company can.
  • Repeated violations open the social media companies up to punitive damages, which is where the big bucks start to show up. Punitive damages are often large enough to make billionaires take note.
  • Removal of the service from the State enacting these laws is evidence that every citizen has been deprived of their civil liberties. Therefore?  The social media company owes a million dollars . . . per citizen.

The idea is simple:  Facebook®, Twitter™, Instagrandma©, and all of the other general purpose social media companies can no longer hide.  Does Aunt Erma’s knitting bulletin board have to let Marxists try to turn knitting communist?

Pugsley’s Grandma knitted him three socks for Christmas.  Why?  We told her he had grown another foot.

Of course not.  Aunt Erma’s knitting board isn’t a general-purpose board.  It’s focused on a single topic.  Social media that’s really small (less than 10,000 daily users?) can ban whoever they want.  They are not really impacting the national agenda.  Social media with over a million daily users that’s not focused around a specific topic?

They can only ban users that violate the law with the content that they posted.

Oddly enough, we could make some of the same arguments the Left does. Recently, an A.I. was able to, based on photographs alone, determine with 75% accuracy who was on the Right and who was on the Left.  We can make being on the Right a protected characteristic.

Being on the Right might not be a choice.  So, if a baker has to bake a gay cake, Twitter® has to host people who have a problem with that.

The beauty of this idea is that we are protecting the civil rights of citizens.  We are fighting for First Amendment protections.  And we are not forcing anyone to do anything special – just don’t ban people who have different ideas than they do.  Corporations are allowed to do a lot of things, but censoring voices that differ from what they think is right is simply not one of them.  Twitter® censored a major United States newspaper because they published data about a candidate that Twitter© didn’t like.

I think this is, at least partially, why marijuana legalization has been so successful in the States that have legalized it:  it is granting additional rights to citizens and businesses.  The Federal government knows that it is on thin ice when it wants to regulate commerce that takes place entirely within a State.

But the Internet doesn’t take place entirely within a State, right?

No.  But we’re not trying to regulate commerce.  We’re protecting the civil rights of our citizens.  And Twitter® and Facebook™ are attempting to market our citizens for money.  They’re engaging in commerce to everyone in the State by offering their free service.  So, if they exclude people (or mute people) because they don’t like their opinion?

They’re discriminating, and if we get this done, they will be illegally discriminating.  And the Right should punish them.  Does Facebook™ need Texas more than Texas needs Facebook©?

It is simple:  Facebook® needs Texas more than Texas needs Facebook™.

What’s the difference between Mark Zuckerberg and Jean Luc Picard?  Picard didn’t sell Data

So, if you’re with me, start working at the State level to get these protections of our essential freedoms in place.  Talk to your State legislators – heck, I’m willing to bet that some readers are State legislators, so let’s get this going.

The place to fight for freedom isn’t only at the Federal level – in fact, the best place to fight for freedom might be at the State level.

We’re not done.  And this isn’t over.