Libertarianism in one country

It’s too late for the USA, but from a theoretical perspective, Steve Sailer is correct about the impossibility of using liberty to lead by engaged example:

It’s time for us good guys to take a lesson in prudence from the bad guys. As you may recall, Trotsky and Stalin had a little falling out. Trotsky wanted to pursue “permanent worldwide revolution.” In contrast, Stalin thought it wiser to concentrate on “revolution in one country,” and only pick off buffer states as circumstances allowed. Stalin won the debate with Trotsky through the penetrating power of his logic (and ice pick), and went on to be the most enduringly successful of the 20th Century’s sizable cast of monsters.

This is what libertarians must realize: There is staggeringly too much inequality in the world for America’s love affair with capitalism to survive importing massive amounts of it.

As my Southern Baptist pastor used to say, it is much easier to pull someone down than it is to lift someone up. Free trade and open borders have turned out to be nearly as significant factors in the American decline as increased government spending and women’s suffrage. None of which, of course, were as important as the establishment of the third central bank, but it is worth noting these things in the process of the ongoing decline and fall in the hopes that future generations will turn out to be wiser than we were.

Just as many of the arguments that pervade our political debate today were presaged one hundred, and sometimes one thousand years ago, we can reasonably expect politicians of the far future to be arguing over whether free trade with the aliens in the Gar Zephrod sector will be of benefit to the economy or not. And we can also expect that leftist equalitarians of the far future will be shocked when the carnivorous Hleetongs of Xpicol IV, who were permitted to settle en masse among the posthuman colonists of New New York, begin devouring their neighbors.


Dutch Einsatzgruppen

Humanity continues to progress towards Seculatopia:

A controversial system of mobile euthanasia units that will travel around the country to respond to the wishes of sick people who wish to end their lives has been launched in the Netherlands. The scheme, which started on Thursday , will send teams of specially trained doctors and nurses to the homes of people whose own doctors have refused to carry out patients’ requests to end their lives. The launch of the so-called Levenseinde, or “Life End”, house-call units – whose services are being offered to Dutch citizens free of charge – coincides with the opening of a clinic of the same name in The Hague, which will take patients with incurable illnesses as well as others who do not want to die at home.”

“In 30 years Holland has moved from assisted suicide to euthanasia, from euthanasia of people who are terminally ill to euthanasia of those who are chronically ill, from euthanasia for physical illness to euthanasia for mental illness, from euthanasia for mental illness to euthanasia for psychological distress or mental suffering, and from voluntary euthanasia to involuntary euthanasia or as the Dutch prefer to call it “termination of the patient without explicit request”.”

In related news, German officials recently announced that they are considering the establishment of a federal Bundeslebensende which would provide involuntary euthanasia services to individuals of Jewish descent regardless of age. The amusing thing is that the Dutch actually profess to be upset by the fact that Rick Santorum is drawing American attention to their murderous practices. Santorum appears to have exaggerated, but is otherwise correct; the figures I have read show that involuntary euthanasia accounts does not account for one-half of all euthanasia cases, but only one-quarter.


Is the goose tapped out?

James Cameron is only the latest member of the super-rich to exit America:

Cameron’s decision fits the trend of wealthy Americans pulling their money out of the country and reinvesting it to buy land in the southern hemisphere, escaping spiraling tax rates and protecting themselves against the potential for widespread social dislocation.

In 2010, John Malone, billionaire chairman of Liberty Media, announced that he had bought a retreat on the Quebec border as an insurance policy to “have a place to go if things blow up here,” adding that he was concerned about the survival of the dollar and whether or not “America (was) going to make it” through the economic crisis.

“My wife, who is very concerned about these things, moved all her personal cash to Australia and Canada,” Malone told the Wall Street Journal, “We own 18 miles on the border, so we can cross. Anytime we want to we can get away.”

The political class are also seeking financial refuge in foreign land buys. The Bush family purchased 100,000 acres in Paraguay back in 2006.

Growing concern that economic stagnation could lead to widespread civil unrest, allied to crippling tax hikes, is causing many members of the super-rich to abandon the United States in pursuit of more stable countries with friendlier financial conditions for those with wealth. According to the Census Bureau, “The top-earning 1% of US taxpayers are leaving the USA at the highest rate in history.” In addition, a Zogby International poll found that more than 3 million US citizens relocate abroad every year, as record numbers of rich US citizens renounce their citizenship to escape punishing levels of taxation.

Now, it’s entirely possible that these elite individuals are all moving abroad for the Tuscan sun and New Zealand sheep-shagging. But that seems unlikely. I don’t think it’s so much a taxation issue as it is a sense that the goose doesn’t have a lot of gold remaining in it.

And yet, it would certainly be interesting to know what it is these very wealthy, very connected individuals know that is driving them to take such drastic, life-altering measures.


You’ve come a long way, baby

One needn’t fail to feel genuine sympathy for the victims of a stupid showboating Italian cruiseship captain to nevertheless be amused at the complaints from women who suddenly find they aren’t so keen on that all-important equality when push comes to shove:

Survivors from the Costa Concordia spoke angrily yesterday of the nightmare evacuation from the stricken ship as women and children were left behind. In the terrifying moments after the giant vessel began to list, fights even broke out to get into the lifeboats. Men refused to prioritise women, expectant mothers and children as they pushed themselves forward to escape. Crew ignored their passengers – leaving ‘chefs and waiters’ to help out.

In heart-rending footage, recorded on mobile phones, British children could be heard shouting ‘Daddy’ and ‘Mummy’ in the melee. As she waited for a flight home from Rome, grandmother Sandra Rogers, 62, told the Daily Mail: ‘There was no “women and children first” policy. There were big men, crew members, pushing their way past us to get into the lifeboats. It was disgusting.’

This was not so much predictable as predicted. Women have methodically attacked the concept of male duty and honor through every possible means for the past ninety years, and now they are whining that they don’t get special treatment simply because a ship happens to be sinking. Why, exactly, should any man “prioritise women, expectant mothers and children”? On what grounds can they be reasonably expected to do so, those outdated traditional grounds that the schools teach is hateful, sexist, and bigoted?

Those big, burly crewmen shoving aside women as they prioritized their own escape should have been wearing t-shirts that said “this is what a feminist looks like”. Enjoy the crash.


Christmas and decline

Sometimes, I wonder if perhaps I am being too negative about the way in which the historical and economic patterns I see appear to be playing out. It’s not as if I spend all my time preparing for disaster, in fact, most of my professional activity is still predicated on the idea that some form of recessionary muddle-through will take place.

And then one encounters these responses of various young adults to their Christmas presents and realize that societal collapse may not be as probable as it is desirable.

One could hardly damn America in a more devastating and conclusive manner than to point out that this is what we have done with our historical freedom


Sand in the iron fist

Even a murderous, totalitarian government isn’t enough to maintain complete control sometimes:

For the first time on record, the Chinese Communist party has lost all control, with the population of 20,000 in this southern fishing village now in open revolt.

The last of Wukan’s dozen party officials fled on Monday after thousands of people blocked armed police from retaking the village, standing firm against tear gas and water cannons.

Since then, the police have retreated to a roadblock, some three miles away, in order to prevent food and water from entering, and villagers from leaving. Wukan’s fishing fleet, its main source of income, has also been stopped from leaving harbour.

The Chinese Communists will win this one of course. But they won’t always win. And they have to win every single time to maintain control. The rebels only have to win once. It is interesting to see how even communist societies have to deal with the realities of socionomic pressure once the credit boom ends.


Sky Patrol USA

Congratulations, Americans! You are now officially living in a police state patrolled by machines in the skies:

Armed with a search warrant, Nelson County Sheriff Kelly Janke went looking for six missing cows on the Brossart family farm on June 23. Three men brandishing rifles chased him off, he said. Janke knew the gunmen could be anywhere on the 3,000-acre spread in eastern North Dakota. Fearful of an armed standoff, he called in reinforcements from the Highway Patrol, a regional SWAT team, a bomb squad, ambulances and deputy sheriffs from three counties. He also called in a Predator B drone.

As the unmanned aircraft circled 2 miles overhead, its sensors helped pinpoint the suspects, showing they were unarmed. Police rushed in and made the first known arrests of U.S. citizens with help from a Predator, the spy drone that has helped revolutionize modern warfare.

That was just the start. Police say they have used two unarmed Predators based at Grand Forks Air Force Base to fly at least two dozen surveillance flights since then. The FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration have used Predators for other domestic investigations, officials said.

“We don’t use [drones] on every call out,” said Bill Macki, head of the police SWAT team in Grand Forks. “If we have something in town like an apartment complex, we don’t call them.”

The drones belong to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which operates eight Predators on the country’s borders to search for illegal immigrants and smugglers. The previously unreported use of its drones to assist local, state and federal law enforcement has occurred without any public acknowledgment or debate.

I have little doubt that 99 percent of all Americans who hear about this will dismiss it as any serious cause for concern “because at least the drones aren’t armed”. The interesting question is what will come first, the first use of an armed drone to kill American citizens inside the US, or the first shooting-down of a military drone by American citizens.

Forget the hacking involved in the capture of a Sentinel drone by Iran. A $200 souped-up Hawk Sky radio-control plane is all that’s needed to take down a $5 million Predator or a $30 million Reaper. I note that 70 of the 223 Predators and Reapers in operation through 2009 were “lost during combat operations” although the military has only admitted to four of them being shot down.


America prepares

Amidst all the terrible news, there is the occasional silver lining:

This year’s Black Friday gun sales broke a record set in 2008 by nearly a third, and while fears about President Obama outlawing some types of firearms are thought to be behind 2008’s record, analysts say this year’s surge in sales is part of a long-term trend. Gun ownership was “politically incorrect” five years ago, but “what seems to be changing is social acceptance,” an analyst at investment firm Avondale Partners tells MSNBC. “I think there might be a changing view of firearms.”

Every state except Illinois now allows residents to carry concealed weapons, and a recent Gallup poll found that 47% of American households own a gun, up from 41% just a year ago.

Between the rapid growth of homeschooling and the rapid growth of gun ownership, Americans appear to stand a reasonable chance of preventing whatever plans their would-be masters have in mind for them. I think the concerns about FEMA camps and the use of the military are somewhat overblown now, especially in light of the proven inability of the US military to deal effectively with insurgencies even in much smaller, more open countries.

From the perspective of a life-long wargamer, I would certainly quail before the challenge of trying to suppress the heavily armed American people, especially since even in the elite, one never truly knows where another’s sympathy lies. The shooting of the police officer at Virginia Tech is a reminder that there are only 800,000 state, local, and federal law enforcement officers in the entire country. They could be wiped out in a week by a population that lives right next door to nearly all of them.

If I were an evil utopian mastermind willing to break as many eggs as needed in order to build a New Society, I’d be looking into biological weapons to counteract the outnumbered and outgunned authorities; one wonders if the zombie craze is yet another example of media programming. One thing that is clear is that not even the “gun-buyers are sick and crazy people” theme as was featured on House this season is convincing anyone.

But Christmas is coming, so do your part and bump that percentage up over 50 percent.


Be grateful for President Obama

It could have been a lot worse… John McCain might have won:

Buried in the annual defense appropriations bill is a provision that would give the President the power to use the military to intern anyone – including American citizens – indefinitely, and hold them without charges or trial, anywhere in the world, including on American soil. The provision essentially repeals the longstanding Posse Comitatus Act, which prevents the military from engaging in law enforcement on US territory – the greatest fear of the Founders. Approved by a Senate subcommittee in secret hearings, the provisions open the road to a military dictatorship in this country – and for that we can thank Senators Carl Levin and John McCain, who introduced the measure. Both the FBI and the Pentagon came out against the Levin-McCain monstrosity, and Senator Mark Udall (D-Colorado) introduced an amendment striking the provision: the amendment was defeated in the Senate, 37-61.

The mind reels.

Given how spectacularly awful McCain has been as a senator, it still boggles the mind that he managed to win the Republican nomination. Any Republican Those who are arguing for supporting Mitt Romney based on the idea that he can defeat Obama in 2012 are forgetting the obvious problem: given his political record and the principle of counter-push, there is absolutely no guarantee that Romney won’t actually turn out to be even worse than Obama.

There can be little question at this point that McCain would have been. The one good thing about Obama is that he is far too passive and lazy to want to be a dictator, because then he would actually have to stop voting present.

On second thought, perhaps Obama might be as bad as McCain after all. Or at least someone in his administration is.

“The initial bill reported by the committee included language expressly precluding ‘the detention of citizens or lawful resident aliens of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.’ The Administration asked that this language be removed from the bill.”

Well, at least we’ll have a bipartisan military dictatorship. And bipartisan is always good, right?


Invest in metals

If Karl Denninger is correct, lead and gold are about the only worthwhile investments these days:

It will not be long ladies and gentlemen, when the bulk of the folks running the algorithms deduce that they’re exposed to the same risks – they have to post margin too, you know, and if it can be stolen then their capital isn’t safe either. These deposits aren’t supposed to be “at risk” when there’s no position actively open — that’s a performance bond against possible failure to pay, but is supposed to be exactly as safe as a bank deposit in a checking account under FDIC limits.

Well, it wasn’t. The CDS you bought on Greece wasn’t. And it will only take another event like this or two before people conclude that everything is unsound as the jackals running the game will redefine the meaning of words to suit themselves and, failing that will simply steal the money.

30+ years of lawless behavior has now devolved down to blatant, in-your-face theft. They don’t even bother trying to hide it any more, and Eric “Place” Holder is too busy supervising the running of guns into Mexico so the drug cartels can shoot both Mexican and American citizens.

What am I, or anyone else, supposed to do in this sort of “market” environment? Invest in…. what? Land titles are worthless as they’ve been corrupted by robosigning, margin deposits have been stolen, Madoff’s clients had confirmations of trades that never happend and proved to worthless pieces of paper instead of valuable securities and while Madoff went to prison nobody else has and the money is still gone!

Without enforcement of the law — swift and certain — there is no deterrent against this behavior.

There has been no enforcement and there is no indication that this will change.

It will take just one — or maybe two — more events like MF Global and Greek CDS “determinations” before the entire market — all of it — goes “no bid” as participants simply stuff their hands in their pockets and say “screw this.”

It’s coming folks, and I guarantee you this: Whatever your “nightmare” scenario is for such an event, it’s not bearish enough.

What concerns me most about all of this is that with a few minor exceptions, most of my economic predictions have been correct with regards to the trend and incorrect because they were too optimistic. Since my medium term predictions are fairly negative, although not catastrophic, you can understand that this pattern of being overly optimistic tends to concern me somewhat.

For example, I expected firms like MF Global to collapse. But I did not expect to hear that they had stolen over a billion dollars that their clients had on account with them. The fraud and the outright theft by the cancerous financial sector is clearly much worse than I, or nearly anyone, had imagined. The fact that Corzine could operate without the proper license, then steal over ONE BILLION DOLLARS without being questioned, much less arrested, will destroy more confidence than even the most heroic measures pushed by the Federal Reserve, the government, and the financial media can create.

Karl is sometimes accused, and not entirely unfairly, of having some chicken little tendencies. But when Chicken Little turns out to be overly optimistic in some regards, it would appear to be indicative of a fairly serious situation.