Libera Voce

“If one admits that a man in his full power might abuse his adversaries, why not admit the same of a majority of men?” Alexis de Tocqueville

The definition of the title is a Latin phrase meaning “beyond the powers”, a legal concept of someone in authority acting or proposing to act beyond the legal limits of the powers defined under law. This legal concept is deeply imbedded in common law, and the US Constitution was constructed to safeguard as best as words can against it. You may not have heard the term used often, although the violations are so numerous in US history that we have become dangerously numb to them. It was about the common nature of such power that de Tocqueville wrote in the opening quote.

While the recent midterm elections were a surprise to many, they really should not have been; Trump tried to make them all about himself, when in reality they were given all his broken promises and abuse of power. True, the economy improved, but he forgot that his base expected him to live up to his promises of no wars, no tariffs (taxes), lower inflation, cut spending and deficits, and reduce the debt. True also that he secured the border and controlled immigration, but you can’t win alone on what you already fixed and then proceed to create another crisis. He may deny that his base didn’t show up, but the numbers show that they voted with their feet and stayed home.

Americans are for the most part patriotic, but not nationalistic, i.e., they don’t want any more wars, especially ones conducted “beyond the powers” defined in the constitution; the “War Powers Act of 1973” was meant to limit the executive branch’s use of military action whereas it has been used all too often, and by many presidents as a way to expand that power. The resulting surge in energy prices hit hardest on the base that got Trump elected. The results also put in office some of the most bizarre and unqualified people imaginable, many of whom propose policies clearly “beyond the powers” defined in the constitution, and in many cases would destroy it.

Another result of the recent elections is a dominated but fractured Congress; dominated by the Democratic Party that is fractured with socialist factions. The Republicans are reeling from embarrassing midterm elections and wondering how to reconnect with an America that doesn’t feel their love. Despite a considerable Democratic majority in both House and Senate, the outcome is likely gridlock, not to mention Trump veto mania and the impeachment obsession. The good news is that we have a silver lining; we will likely have gridlock which hopefully will at least mitigate the impact of the socialist surge in the Democratic Party and maybe provide for a more rational approach to the Iranian War. Unfortunately, this would be the lesser of two evils, a consequence of having to choose between them for far too long now.

What we have, as Benjamin Franklin famously responded when asked at the Constitutional Convention what it would give us, “A Republic, if you can keep it.” What we also have is a unique constitution to protect our republic, unique because it was not constructed to rule the people, but to rule those that are elected to govern; historically, this constitutional concept was rare in that it limited the powers of the elected by not only defining them clearly and specifically to the exclusion of everything else, but by separating and balancing the principal elements of government. If you are wondering why some politicians are calling for radical changes to such a structure, it’s all about getting “beyond the powers” as defined by the constitution.

The frustration with this state of play is shared by many people who realize that the corruption of our society and politics has at its source the pursuit of power and is therefore the real root of all evil. Unfortunately, there are also many people who accept political narratives that provide cover for the pursuit of power. The more vague the narrative, the greater the cover; narratives seldom if ever provide facts that support a specifically identified problem, but to focus on a solution we need first to correctly identify the problem, and empirical evidence is where we can start. For example, if criminal activity increases, it indicates that there could be more criminals, or a lack of enforcement of criminal law, or perhaps both.

Unfortunately, most politicians are tone deaf to reality if it impedes their pursuit of power, so they construct narratives that seek to replace reality with virtue signaling that plays well for elections, but not for solutions. I do not say this in support for either of the two major parties as I have come to the conclusion that both are guilty of this, it’s just a matter of degree and not principles. In our times, political perception is shaped by those that accept the rhetoric of narratives; common sense should tell us that if it plays to the crowd, we need to leave the crowd and think for ourselves, disregard the labels, and maybe get lucky and find the few who are running for office that also have some common sense. The first and foremost responsibility of government is the security and safety of its citizens; if a politician spins a narrative that does not support that responsibility, they’re after power, in which case you should vote with your feet and walk away.

“Politics is the business of getting power and privilege without possessing merit.” P. J. O’Rourke

“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.” Thomas Paine

It is alarming that the use of logic, the bedrock of common sense, is rejected in much of our culture today as an example of oppression; it’s an age of emotion versus reason, and reason doesn’t appear to be winning. The Enlightenment of the 17C and 18C was a cultural phenomenon that put reason, science and liberty above emotion, ignorance, and the state. We are now in the age of victimhood, where everything from the past and in the present is conjured up as a justification for stupidity, and we have the receipts.

Evidence

The jury in the Lindsay Clancy Case apparently tried to bully a lone juror who would not ignore the evidence in order to vote their way; the evidence against the defendant was overwhelming, including a confession, proof of premeditation and manipulation in the homicide of her children. This was a proverbial open-and-shut case, except for those jurists who somehow thought that a man capable of critical thinking would ignore the evidence. When it was unethically exposed that the lone jurist was a black man, all the legacy media could do was stutter. The implicit racism was so obvious that only stupid people could ignore the hypocrisy.

Money

Fed chairman Kevin Warsh held a press conference yesterday after it was announced that the “Federal Open Market Committee” (FOMC) voted to keep interests rates unchanged; this despite the fact that inflation was still a serious issue exposed the Fed to catering to politics given the pending midterm elections. The diversion of this decision from the reality of UST bond rates illustrates again the corruption of central banking systems, a front for government money manipulation inherent in fiat currencies; you have to be really stupid to believe in the independence of the Federal Reserve.

Wealth

You hear all the noise from “progressives” (a code word for socialists) about a wealth tax (another code word for eating the rich); as JSB Morse so brilliantly observed, “You eat the wealthy, sir, and it will be your last meal.” Socialists are only concerned with the taking and redistribution of wealth, not creating it. An economy progresses with investment of capital which creates jobs; ultimately, it’s work that creates the only means to wealth, other than inheritance and cronyism. It’s not so much that wealthy people are smart and good, which we can see not all are, but that those that think wealth is bad are stupid.

Religion and Socialism

Most Americans profess some religious affiliation, but many also profess a distrust of socialism. While there have been about 10,000 religions and collectivist cults throughout world history, all are based on the absurd proposition that it is a virtue to be satisfied without evidence. If religions or socialism depended on facts, there would be neither; this is not a criticism about a belief in God, or not, but a plea to abandon ignorance and blind faith and return to a culture of reason…or remain stupid.

Happiness

Thomas Jefferson changed John Locke’s summary of natural law from “Life, Liberty and Property”, to “…life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Jefferson explained the revision as necessary to avoid criticism of the property requirements for voting, but clearly it was a way to avoid plagiarism as voting no longer required property, only citizenship, which is now criticized as oppression…really, more victimization and suffering? I’ll go with Robert Green Ingersoll’s definition that “Happiness is not a reward, it is a consequence. Suffering is not a punishment, it is a result.” Yes, a result of stupidity, which just makes life tougher.

Campaign Platforms

Simply put, such platforms are for the stupid among us as P. J. O’Rourke observed that “Yes, the campaign platforms are lies. But these are important lies. They reflect the candidate’s interior monologues. The lies give us a picture of a candidate’s self-image because the first person a candidate lies to is himself.” Well OK, but who are the second people…oh yes, us!

Multiculturalism

This word is an invention of absurdity, if not naked stupidity; of course there are a multitude of cultures throughout world history, but that does not define what is good or bad, just what was and today what is. The word however is a disingenuous attempt to redefine Western Civilization as some great evil of oppression to justify a demand for inclusiveness and reparations for victimization by and to people who no longer even exist.

Conclusions

In the simplest terms, what philosophers refer to as a “razor” is the result of critical thinking, a process most of us think of as common sense; it’s a way to avoid obvious errors. For example, we have Occam’s razor that “The simplest explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is usually the correct one.”; and then there’s Hanlon’s razor that “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.” However, what do we call stupidity created by intentional malice? While not all the examples of stupidity of this and the prior post qualify as intentional malice, it is disturbing that some do, while amazing that some are just what our commonsense tells us are just plain stupid stuff.

“Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe.” Albert Einstein

“Life is tough, but it’s even tougher if you’re stupid.” ANON

Amazing that the authors of the most commonsense stuff like the above quote, possibly an emergency room staffer, are anonymous; maybe that’s why we call it commonsense, meaning we assume that because it’s self-evident everyone thinks similarly. Like most assumptions, that would be a mistake, so I thought about some commonsense stuff and then compared it to what we see and hear in mass and social media and there it is, proof of bad assumptions.

Women’s Sports

The reason it’s called what it is means it’s sports for women, unless of course human biology is unrelated to the means by which our species procreates; that takes both men and women. What women’s sports does not mean is that a man who decides he’s a women can play sports with women; while that would be a boom for the medical profession, it would be the end of women’s sports. There are physically overwhelming differences between men and women, so if you don’t know that, you’re making life tougher.

Registered Voter

The latest statistics show that there are 133M registered voters in the US, 74M Republicans and 81M Democrats; I don’t have the statistics for other (third) parties, but these numbers don’t add up. Another statistic is that the total electorate is 32% Democrat, 28% Republican and the rest, some 40% are independent. So not only are the numbers for registered voters wonky, but when taken together as percentages means there would be about 53M independent voters, leaving 80M for the Democrats and Republicans. Arithmetic is basic commonsense, but the numbers we are given are not.

Tariffs

A basic business principle is to follow the money, a commonsense approach to see how things are going; to be told that the tariffs are being paid by businesses importing stuff into the US is not only disingenuous, it’s a bold face lie, and the proof is found if you just follow the money to the price tag of whatever you’re buying. Someone must really think we’re stupid.

Fraud

To blame all the money tied up in illegal practices in government funded programs on various NGOs or other similar groups is only half true; the other half are those in government who enable such activity, whether through incompetence, willful ignorance, or direct involvement. We are told about indictments, pending charges, ongoing investigations, but what commonsense tells us is that until those in government are “held accountable” this is all a show, and if it’s that stupid, our lives will get tougher.

War

First there was “Midnight Hammer”, and it was commonsense to stop terrorists from going nuclear; we were told it was a smashing success (OK, pun intended); estimates were that it would take Iran anywhere from three to ten years to recover its nuclear program, mission accomplished. Then we went to war anyway, and not even legally; they call it “Epic Fury”, but so far, the only epic part is time as what was called a matter of weeks is approaching a year. When you claim victory, commonsense means the war is over; what we now hear is its likely resumption. If you’re confused, it’s not because you’re stupid, it’s because you’re paying attention.

Polls

Recently Wedgewood, a well known and quoted polling service stated that it completely fabricated survey data in order to illustrate to the public indiscriminately accepted projections used by Newsweek, The Hill, Breitbart, the Daily Beast, Washington Examiner, New York Times, Nate Silver, VoteHub and FiftyPlusOne. Recalling the results of the last three elections compared with the polls, the disparity should by now alert us all to the simple fact that polls mean nothing because they have persistently proved false. The lesson is to vote based on what you think, not what you are told; the former is commonsense, the latter is stupidity.

Protests

Peaceful is a description for the majority of protests as reported by legacy media; however, from the “Summer of Love” to “Paris Burning” we see vandalism, arson, and assaults. The difference between what we see and what we are told could not be more telling that commonsense demands an accounting for such “misinformation”, if not “disinformation”; unfortunately, stupidity often wins out.

We could go on…and we will; more stupid stuff to follow, but in the meantime consider what Morgan Freeman recently observed when he said, “We live in a time where intelligent people are being silenced so that stupid people won’t be offended.” So, when you hear stupid stuff like the above, don’t be silent, call it out for what it is because only stupid people will be offended.

The title of this post is taken from a famous book, which soon became a famous movie, about the liberation of Paris in August of 1944. There are so many famous people involved with this film from 1966 that it boggles the mind we haven’t heard more about it today, especially given the fact that Paris is now actually burning. The essence of the book and movie is about Hitler’s command that should the Allies advance and take Paris, it should be destroyed; the Nazis were good at that sort of thing, but the German general in charge, Dietrich von Choltitz, refused to obey and surrendered.

Today, we are not so lucky as a cabal of student activists, socialists, Jihadists, and other nefarious groups, more than fifty at last count, apparently funded by former American expat IT billionaire Neville Roy Singham living in Shanghai, China, are succeeding where Hitler failed; this is not limited to Paris as it is suspected to be the source of funding for many protests that turned into violent riots in many countries, including the US. While its goal apparently is to create chaos in the West that could lead to a socialist/communist political domination, Singham has repeatedly denied involvement or association with the CCP.

The reason for the riots claimed by the “Party for Socialism and Liberation” (PSL) and the “General Confederation of Labor” (CGT) and other “far-left” groups, operating under various code names like the “Yellow Vests” and “Code Pink”, is a lack of funding for education and social services. What they ignore is the uncomfortable truth that France’s quasi-socialism is actually the root cause of a bankrupt country. While Macron and his “Renaissance” party flounder with anemic responses like curfews and banning public gatherings, Marine Le Pen, president of the “far-right” opposition party “National Rally” looks poised to win big in the upcoming elections next Spring.

So the answer to the title of this post is yes, Paris is burning, but it’s more than that; what is actually happening is that the essence of true “liberalism” as was developed in the West is being put to the torch. I have visited Paris numerous times in my life, and I agree with Hemingway that “Paris is a moveable feast.” as once you’ve been there, it stays with you forever. It is beautiful and romantic, infused with art, culture, and the joy of life, which makes it the perfect target for destruction by everything that despises such things.

Paris burning is tragic, but it is also a symbol; this is more than some contest between the “far-left” and the “far-right”, political labels with at best incoherent definitions; it’s a matter of life and death of a free society under attack by those that prefer domination, collectivism, death and destruction. Hopefully, the French will overcome this tragic episode and save their republic and the “City of Light” and remember the famous line in “Sabrina” that “Paris is always a good idea.”

“Politicians and diapers must be changed often and for the same reason.” Mark Twain

Depending on their political affiliations, all mass and social media claim that the 2026 midterm election results will be catastrophic. Objectively, this may or may not be another “rinse-and-repeat”. Remember the 1992 presidential campaign? We were at war in Iraq, the economy was trying to recover from recession, and both social activism and the national debt were big news. Bill Clinton was considered a long shot and indeed seemed clueless amid all the angst; then his presidential campaign strategist James Carville coined the famous political axiom, “It’s the economy, stupid!” Bush didn’t catch on, but Clinton did and won.

While this upcoming midterm election is not presidential, Trump is making it all about himself; like Bush, he’s at war, both in trade and in Iran. It is true that the Biden administration is responsible for the egregious inflation, crime, failed immigration, and truly creepy social policies, all of which the Trump administration has done some good to correct, but war and tariffs have eroded what should have been an historic reversal of midterm losses for incumbents. Trump forgot about Carville’s axiom, and his promise to his MAGA base that there would be no more wars or deficits and the economy would boom; well, while Wall Street is booming, Main Street is stalling, and that puts the midterms in play.

Predictably both Democrats and Republicans throw partisan labels around as campaign strategy; true, the Democratic Party is in a civil war with their own Democratic Socialists, a self-inflicted wound, as is the Republican Party’s betrayal of their promises to their MAGA base. What’s at stake is not only who will control our national legislature, but who will do less harm; there’s another famous axiom about politics, this from P. J. O’Rourke, a sorely missed journalist who said, “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” Adding insult to injury, the amount of fraud, no longer in the thousands or even millions, but billions of taxpayer dollars underscore O’Rourke’s observation.

The more this race becomes a toss-up, the more the outcome will likely result in serious social distress, regardless of who wins. Both parties spew partisan hyperbole on all the issues involved like A.I., energy, war, fraud, climate, immigration, gender identity, crime, terror, etc., and both are guilty of catastrophizing the outcome if the other party should win. While socialism is always a bad idea, war and tariffs are part of it. What we have here is another case of the American people having to choose between the lesser of two evils, creating social anxiety that things could get worse, a condition that Aristotle describes as “Fear is pain arising from the anticipation of evil.”

The polls provide no real clarity as to where the election is headed but do provide politicians the opportunity to “adjust” their positions to suit whatever popular sentiment the polls imply; some of these adjustments are blatant reversals, some plagiarized policies even of the competition, and some disingenuous proposals meant to confuse the electorate into thinking there’s merit where there’s only narrative. The one thing the polls have clarified is that extremists have taken control of both major parties such to a degree that those who don’t conform to their positions are denounced as traitors, racists, or are themselves radicals for not being obedient apparatchiks as in the old Soviet society.

The polls also show a huge increase in those that claim to be independents; this has been defined curiously as anyone who is “undecided”, which given the current political state of play provides no coherent definition at all. However, I’ll go with P. J. O’Rourke’s definition that, “An independent is a person who doesn’t know what to think and is proud of it.” While O’Rourke’s definition is humorous, it’s also tragic; it implies ignorance, perhaps even willful of those existential principles that define our republic, as if such things don’t even matter. Some independents may be those that given the current political state of play find participation repulsive and don’t bother voting; that is truly tragic as it undermines the very concept of representative government. I am hopeful that Americans will use their common sense and not only get out and vote this midterm but make sure they vote based on those existential principles.

“Anyway, no drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we’re looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn’t test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power.” P. J. O’Rourke

The title of this post is actually better known as the “Hippocratic Oath”, the foremost ethical mandate of the medical profession as first proscribed in Hippocrates’s work “Of the Epidemics”; the clear and unequivocal meaning of the oath is that in the practice of medical service there can be no physical, psychological, or societal injury to patients.

While Anthony Fauci faces increased scrutiny of his actions as they relate to the “Covid Pandemic”, we get narratives, but little clarity on either the source of the virus or the efficacy of the vaccines we were coerced to get based on little more than assurances from those sworn to protect us. While our politicians, health organizations and the medical industry continue to this day to assure us that all is well, and that there are no reasons to be concerned about the long-term effects of the covid vaccines and accuse those that question otherwise of misinformation if not disinformation, the disclosure of Fauci’s “journal” contradicts that narrative.

It’s amazing that a man who was supposedly the world’s covid champion could be so arrogantly open about his malfeasance as to record it on a government server, and then to claim the 5^th Amendment over a hundred times during recent Senate hearings, a tactic admission of guilt; it’s hard to understand such arrogance when combined with blatant insolence. Add to this that he was protected by a preemptive presidential pardon, and the obvious screams of corruption…but then again so does government involvement that consistently obscured transparency.

There were and are a lot of claims about the experimental technology with which the vaccine was developed, including those that researched and developed mRNA, principally Dr. Robert Malone, who early on cautioned that it was not yet ready for the development of vaccines, and certainly not for human consumption; while he was accused of just about everything for doing so, what we didn’t get, other than those same repeated assurances, were anything clarifying the concern about the lack of data in testing. The universally recognized paradigm for scientific research is the scientific method, a rigorous process for developing empirical proof for a hypothesis based on data from controlled and repeatable testing.

We were told by the World Health Organization (WHO) that COVID-19 vaccines had been tested for decades, which was disingenuous propaganda as the existence of Covid 19 was only first identified in December of 2019; it is true that mRNA technology had been researched for decades as a potential development in cancer research and treatment. Then we were told that Pfizer received “…emergency validation…” in December of 2020 based on clinical trials; when that claim was challenged based on simple timeline considerations, it was dismissed because there was a lack of sufficient time to do so, a tacit admission of short circuiting the scientific method. That was the first indication that not all was disclosed to us about the origin of the virus, its potency, or the development and efficacy of the vaccine initially evaluated as 90-95%, which later proved to be more like 30-40%, about the average for the seasonal flu vaccine.

What also later came out was the lack of reliable data on the Covid 19 fatality rates, with huge variances attributed to “extreme data heterogeneity”, or in other words a lack of reliable data; depending on location, demographics and methods we have as little as 0.1% to as high as nearly 15%, a radical variance that renders such data nearly useless. The low side was attributed to a lack of testing, and the high side to the fact that anyone who died with a positive covid test regardless of the actual cause of morbidity was reported as a covid death; this was further complicated by the disclosure that the government underwrote a hospital’s costs in treating covid cases, i.e., make it covid and you make money.

In Europe much of the above was not the case, particularly in Sweden, where despite the lack of draconian protocols as in the US and some EU countries, they had the lowest rates of infection and mortality; given the increased reports of serious side effects from the vaccine, it’s curious how readily the medical establishment dismisses them. With all that background noted, it was disconcerting that late last year the European Society of Medicine (ESM), equivalent to our American Medical Association (AMA) reported in its Medical Research Archives following years of research, “Compound Impacts of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Convergence of Diverse Spikeopathies and Other Hybrid Harms” ; basically, it reported that this vaccine was as Dr. Malone initially cautioned as just not ready for human consumption as it was alarmed that by targeting proteins it had genetic ramifications that were far more dangerous than reported or even understood by the pharmaceutical industry or health organizations that were entrusted with safeguarding public health. 

Considering all the above, including the unethical policies of the US government and its proxies, the sacred oaths we rely on both medically and constitutionally were callously violated in favor of power and profit; the simple truth was we were lied to, and with an arrogance that maintained that the “…science was settled…”.

“Truth is ever to be found in simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things.” Isaac Newton

“I’m very depressed how in this country you can be told “That’s offensive!” as though those two words constitute an argument.” Christopher Hitchens

Recently I was told on a certain social platform that a post of mine “violated community standards” because it might be considered offensive by some people. I was informed that the post had been removed and that if “this continued”, I would be permanently barred. I was miraculously able to find a way to communicate with the gate keepers of that social platform (chat option, so who knows who or what I was “chatting” with) and asked why they found it so and what specific standard was violated; I was directed to what is commonly called the “Terms and Conditions of Use.”, which read like a sophomoric essay about avoiding expressing just about any idea based on reason and logic. I have not published on that platform since as I don’t do “woke” and admit I am addicted to the use of the forbidden reason and logic paradigm.

Years ago, I think it was 2022, I read an interview in “Reason” (very catching name for a publication, likely “triggered” some people) with the famous actor and comic satirist John Cleese discussing comedy and how modern culture was basically killing it; one of his remarks was that “Wokeness is people sitting around deliberately waiting for the thrill of being offended.” Every time I hear some particularly stupid woke idea, I also hear Cleese’s definitive summary of this mental disorder.

During the 2024 presidential election campaign, I was asked by both Democratic and Republican friends who I would vote for; they all knew I was a libertarian who would vote for neither major party and didn’t subscribe to the “lesser-of-two-evils” rationalization. This was a replay of the same situation in 2016, but this time I mischievously played them and said if there were no alternatives I would vote for Trump. Most were shocked knowing that I really didn’t like this guy, and even more so when I espoused the “lesser-of-two-evils” rationalization because I detested the support of the rampant “wokeness” in the Democratic Party. In some cases, friends pointed out my long-standing aversion to the “lesser-of-two-evils” rationalization because by definition it could only provide evil; some lectured me as to where the word “woke” came from, which we all know was from African American culture cautioning awareness of danger, a reality for blacks in the Jim Crow South. 

I had played this game to see what the reactions would be; invariably Republicans encouragingly supported my decision as if it were a religious conversion, while Democrats were appalled and also dismissed the “wokeness” claim as just a Republican narrative. I eventually confessed my mischief, which in both cases predictably produced similar reactions as neither accepted or in some cases even understood libertarianism. However, the one thing that had similar reactions was their disclaimer about “wokeness”, which I also think neither really understood. Imagine if I had told them that they both in dissimilar but ultimately fatal means and methods supported socialism, a sacred mantra of the woke.

Other than basic existential principles, everything changes over time, and wokeness is no exception; unfortunately, it always gets worse. Take for instance the growing antisemitism coupled with anti-Islamophobia promoted among progressives, socialists (redundant, right?) and of course Muslims; actually, that’s an example of “strange bedfellows” if there ever was one. Imagine a scenario where advocates for LGBTQ found themselves in a Muslim country were they would be thrown off roofs, or even worse. They might try arguing with their newfound friends that silencing an argument is not the same thing as winning one…as they find themselves experiencing the reality of gravity.  In a way, they are all part of the “Wokerati”, who on the one hand deflect criticism by claiming that there’s all this misunderstanding about who and what they represent, which happens when you’re bold face liars.

Being “Woke” became all the rage in 2014 with the BLM movement and the crusade for social justice, a concept that represented the classical “basic fallacy of assumptions”, i.e., beliefs that have no factual basis; this used to be called “begging the question” where the premise of the argument is presented as a conclusion, a fact without evidence. In the George Floyd case, the facts were that the police officer was sentenced to over 20 years in prison for murder and civil rights violations; justice was served but this case was used as a justification for what became known as the “Summer of Love”, a prolonged national “peaceful protest” that was in reality a rampant orgy of arson, vandalism and violence destroying the property and businesses of many innocent victims, none of whom had anything to do with the Floyd case. The justification for such criminality was rage against systemic racism, but where was the justice for the victims of the destruction that followed? Well, there was none because that did not fit into the progressive narrative.

What followed was a disjointed outpouring of grievances and victimhood, mostly having nothing to do with the Floyd case. Suddenly we had victims of just about every transgression imaginable, many we never even knew existed, and usually didn’t. Most philosophers considered such behavior “sophistry” meaning providing false arguments as a deception; the question we should ask is what purpose does that serve, but should you ask, you are now considered racist, fascist, misogynist, and a whole pantheon of evil labels to shame you. There are “Trigger Warnings” “Microaggressions”, “Oppressor Politics”, “Transphobia” “Ableism” …and an endless list of transgressions you could be guilty of without even knowing what they are; neither do the accusers.  

“It is amazing how many people think that they can answer an argument by attributing bad motives to those who disagree with them. Using this kind of reasoning, you can believe or not believe anything about anything, without having to bother to deal with facts or logic.” Thomas Sowell

“I thought the left was a mental problem, but it’s actually a disease of the soul. It’s built on envy, hatred, resentment, and unequal treatment under the law. When they run out of arguments, they resort to violence.” Javier Milei

The fact that the author of the above quote is still alive amazes me, but unfortunately I fear it could be just a matter of time; there is so much misinformation/disinformation about Milei, but more threatening is the realization by many supporting factions that they knew so little about him or the libertarian principles he represents, which are contrary to their interests. The reason why I think Milei is still alive now, in a country whose history does not support political stability, is that his policies have actually worked, and just as importantly the people see and understand that; however, for that very reason I fear that those factions, many Peronist, could eventually politically and/or physically attempt to kill him or they will lose whatever power they have left. Fascism is socialism, and libertarians are not welcome.

Argentina was previously politically similar to the US, and in fact further along the socialist path. Trump is by no means a libertarian, whereas Milei is all in. Trump is not a friend of free trade, whereas Milei is. Trump is a spender whereas Milei is not. Milei is an economic realist, whereas Trump is a narcissistic grifter. Trump has world power in hand whereas Milei has only facts. Despite all this, Trump and Milei are friendly, and both profess disdain for socialism; however, it’s Milei who just doesn’t talk about it, but acts against it, and that’s where the difference lies. Trump’s insatiable lust for power is really not different from his opponents, who lately spend more time criticizing him than providing viable alternatives; however, after considering borders/immigration and gender identity, we have little to differentiate Republicans from Democrats.

The US has a midterm election coming, which of course in the age of Trump means some level of violence from his detractors and possibly even his supporters; this is what radical partisanship means folks, so get used to it. In a recent poll, nearly 40% of Democrats support a coup to remove Trump, some even an assassination; at the very least, assuming the Democrats win the House, an impeachment…here we go again! As a libertarian I see the predicted midterm election results as a self-inflicted wound by the Republicans given Trump’s failure to keep a critical campaign promise not to engage in another war, which in the case with Iran caused an energy crisis and higher cost of living; add tariffs and you have three strikes with one pitch, leaving the bases loaded. The Democrats, despite their own self-inflicted wounds with support for socialism and lack of support for women’s rights, plus growing antisemitism, seemingly gave Republicans a chance to avoid the historical shift in Congress against the incumbents; while the economy is better under Trump than Biden, it’s not where he promised we would be.

Milei on the other hand exceeded his campaign promises, cutting inflation, spending, regulations and big government, creating growth Argentina has not seen in a long time, and the people love him for it. Up until the Great Depression, Argentina was one of the wealthiest countries in the world, so much so that the phrase “Rich as an Argentine” described the high per capita wealth of the country. Enter Juan Peron in the mid 1940’s with his authoritarian and socialist regimes that left Argentina impoverished; enter Milei and the road to recovery has been spectacular in contrast to the country’s prior regimes, which shows how free market economics benefits the people, and not the crony power elites.

The contrast between Trump and Milei should be a lesson to Americans that the two party cabal that has ruled this country have slowly but surely brought us excruciating debt, deficits, wars, societal and cultural decline; neither of these two political parties are willing to address the root problems that underpin the crises we seem to find ourselves in time and again for fear that the solutions will make them unpopular. While they sling slogans and derogatory labels at each other, Milei attacks the problems with policies that work. While both Republicans and Democrats kick the can down the road, Milei kicks bureaucrats out of office. While both Trump and Milei are known for their flamboyant personalities and strong media presence, Trump spouts superlatives, mostly inaccurate, about what he has done, while Milei incites Argentines to seize the freedoms that make a people succeed. Milei knew that he needed to communicate with the people what they needed to do to make Argentina great again; Trump tried the same thing, got elected, and then forgot about his promises.

“I didn’t come here to lead lambs, but to awaken lions.” Javier Milei

“A man is not dead until he is forgotten.” Unknown Soldier

How ironic that it was someone who is unknown, which means whoever he was, is credited with this quote regardless of the fact that his name is now forgotten; despite this, his soul is still with those he loved and who loved him. There are friends of mine who, knowing that I’m an atheist, are amazed that I even think there is such a thing as a soul; to their surprise I tell them that it’s the soul that makes us human, we are born with it, but we die without our soul as it now passes to those we loved and loved us. They will always remember us, and that is our immortality.

The idea of the soul is culturally embedded in every society that developed a culture. People can look alike, but there are no two souls alike, even twins. Soul, or the spirit of a person includes character, personality, intelligence, emotions, beliefs, and social awareness, all combining in an infinite variety. When you “…get to know someone…”, you begin to get a sense of what “…makes them tick…” or whatever common phrase that expresses what your common sense tells you about someone that their looks don’t. One of the oldest proverbs from ancient philosophy …yes, author unknown…is “The eyes are the windows of the soul.” This is why eye contact is so essential if people are genuinely interested in getting to know one another; avoidance indicates a “… troubled soul” …ok, yet another common phrase, as common as common sense.

I always wonder at all the people who walk around us who look everywhere except at the people around them, sometimes at their “smart phones” (worst ever), or the sky, but are unaware of who is around them; it’s robotic behavior, a habit of modern times where communication skills are sorely lacking. If you were to look into their eyes, they would look away; if you engage in conversation with such people, they may feel “triggered”. Why are there so many troubled souls? Now here’s where people with common sense, those who look around where they are, who can look a person straight in the face (their eyes of course), be able to engage in civil communication, have an edge on those that don’t…it’s called being human precisely because humans by nature are social animals.

I think many of those troubled souls are victims of catastrophizing, which has been defined succinctly in Psychology Today as a “…cognitive distortion that prompts people to jump to the worst possible conclusion, usually with very limited information or objective reason to despair. When a situation is upsetting, but not necessarily catastrophic, they still feel like they are in the midst of a crisis.” While we lament the fact that generation whatever lacks what it takes to act like rational adults, we ignore the fact that current education lacks the ability to provide the necessary skills to do so; instead, it provides an endless supply of catastrophizing indoctrination whether that be population, climate, and now “Artificial Intelligence”.

According to any of these “artificial” crises, the human species should have been eradicated decades ago, or will be soon, and yet…well, here we are; tricky thing about the soul is that it lives in the living well after a human dies, making what it’s made of immortal. While we are being catastrophized about artificial intelligence, it is little more that an attempt to have computers mimic the way the human brain works; given that the soul of humans are of infinite variety, there is no intelligence in existence, artificial or organic, that can account for infinity because the nature of infinity precludes by definition any calculation, i.e., by definition the results are infinite.

The ethos of humanity is summed up by its soul, and that ethos is love of humanity. This is such a rational conclusion that the father of logic, reason and of the laws of identity defined both love and the soul in what must be a very “…soul searching” (couldn’t resist) definition of both:

“Love is composed of a single soul inhabiting two bodies.” Aristotle

“When a sinister person means to be your enemy, they always start by trying to become your friend.” William Blake

As I listened to the 9/11 Ceremony this morning, and the hauntingly mournful Sarabande by Bach played by renowned cellist Yo-Yo Ma, I began to realize that the depth of the tragedy of that day was not just about that event, but the extent of the evil behind it both in time and intent. I am not afraid of being labeled Islamophobic for understanding and despising a barbaric culture of hate and death masquerading as a religion known as Islam; I am more afraid of being what Edmund Burke described as “One that confounds good and evil is an enemy to good.”

History tells us, if we are open minded to its lessons, that Islam has always been about violence and domination. True, the Crusades and the Christianity that incited it was more about conquest, wealth, power and land than protecting pilgrims; ultimately it lost, and Islam went on to conquer most of Africa, a lot of Asia, and at one point Spain, and parts of Eastern Europe. It was not until after the Great War that the Ottoman Empire collapsed, but in its place, we got the chaos out of which grew what we call today Radical Islam and the rebirth of Jihad.

For the true believers of Islam, the West is, and has always been, the enemy, not just because it’s mostly Christian, but because it evolved culturally through the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and the enterprise of its people to provide a level of prosperity and freedom not seen in most of the world, despite its own record of wars and authoritarian regimes. However, as we can see today, the West also carried in much of its societies a fatal flaw contrary to its professed love of freedom called collectivism as represented by socialist factions such as Fascism, Nazism, Communism, and a growing tolerance for such horrible ideologies, especially within the very institutions that are supposedly the guardians of “Western Civilization”.

It is apparent given the celebrations among the Muslim communities in the US during the horrors of 9/11, and then again following the 10/07/23 Hamas massacres in Israel, that we should not be surprised about people like Hassan Piker, Graham Platner, Ilhan Omar, Lateefah Simon, Rashida Tlaib and others, some of whom serve in our House of Representatives, supporting Jihadist terror; these people, who profess to be fellow Americans, are not our friends. Even worse, we see the protests in our universities in support of such obvious evils and yet many Americans refuse to see it for what it is. This is not some random series of events or spontaneous empathetic concern for the “oppressed” but a continuation of Islam’s goal for world domination.

The fact that countries like Saudi Arabia who financed the 9/11 attacks, Iran who finances Hamas and Hezbollah, Qatar who finances American and other Western universities may seem diverse in nature but not in intent; through violence and systemic corruption of our institutions we have the existential threat to every human being who refuses to bow to Islam and adhere to Sharia law. We should know this not only by their actions but their own words that even their migrations to Western countries are part of Jihad. About one third of the world is Christian, a quarter Muslim, and the rest Hindi, etc.; it’s curious that 85% of the world’s refugees are Muslim, yet not one of 56 Muslim countries, 11 of which are the richest in the world, are taking in refugees.

So where is the tribute to the victims of 9/11 in all this? Well, it’s not just that we will never forget because that’s not good enough. It’s not that we now have laws such as the “The Patriot Act” that undermine the very essence of our constitutional liberty. It’s not that we invaded the wrong countries in retribution. It’s not that we have had endless wars that accomplished nothing. It’s not our mindless empathy for the very enemies who want to destroy us. So where then is the tribute to those who have suffered these and other horrible events; what do we as Americans do to honor our fellow citizens who died for the mere crime of being Americans?

Well to start, we need to become again real patriots, not some flag waving hyped up crowd drunk on nationalistic fervor, but true patriots who love, support and defend this country, not some foreign land who our government tells us represents our national security; that means we have a deep emotional connection to the people, land, culture and principles that constitute American society. What we do not need is a misguided aggressive ideology of national supremacy as a world power.

Patriotism has nothing to do with political parties or government, and everything to do with the simple common sense that in order to remain free we must preserve and protect our devotion to liberty. It also requires a willingness to respect the rights of others in order to foster a sense of community. This is a societal issue, not a political one which has more to do with allegiance to government than to founding principles. Our tribute to the victims of 9/11 should be that we will unite in true patriotism against those who want to destroy us and not devolve into toxic partisanship.

“The best way to get along is never to forgive an enemy or forget a friend.” Walter Winchell