04 August 2015

Star Crusade - Human Sphere - Intro

Mankind in the last years of the 40th century occupies what is called the HUMAN SPHERE.  This rough, more or less, sphere is further divided into two lobes or hemispheres.  The Westerly or Trailing-wise lobe centered on the Earth Human homeworld of Earth is commonly called the Sword Worlds, or the Solomani Sphere, or sometimes the Inner Sphere.  The Easterly or Spinward lobe centered on the Villein Human homeworld of V'land, or as its more commonly known today, New Earth, is commonly called the Padishah Hegemony or the Outer Sphere.

The two lobes of the Human Sphere are more or less united in theory into a single Imperium Solaris Sacrum, or Holy Star Empire, but in practice the First Lord of the Terran Star League rules as Westerly Emperor of the Inner Sphere Sword Worlds, and the Padishah Hegemon of the Villein Star Hegemony rules as the Easterly Emperor of the Outer Sphere Novo Terran Star Hegemony.

Both the Star League and the Star Hegemony are successor states to the Old Hegemony which once ruled all the worlds of man for five long, life-span extended generations, before the civil wars and disasters of the Occultation of the Stars broke the Old Hegemony in the long emergency of the Interregnum.

The other major race of Man, the Villein, where once themselves ruled by the fungoid serpent-parasites called the Shan of Shaggai, who burrowed into the brain-stems of their subjects and posed as Gods who ruled their cattle-subjects absolutely and nourished themselves from the faith-food and blood-food of their subject-worshipers.  This state of affairs lasted until the young men of the Ancient Earth Alliance, together with their green blooded Rhomulani allies, cast out the Shan, and ground their heads beneath the soles of their jack-boots.  Officially the Shan are extinct, but rumors abound of prideful men willing to strike terrible bargains for unholy powers and long life.


Star Crusade - Intro

Far in the Future, in a Dying Galaxy lit only by Burning World-Pyres and the twilight of Fading Suns...


Turmoil has engulfed the Galaxy.  It is 3999, and the Great Houses of the Trailing-wise Human Sphere, the SWORD WORLDS, are once again sliding into conflict, within and without.  The Great Noble Houses see a Throne of Terra occupied by a BOY KING, and each of the Noble Patriarchs sees himself wearing the Purple and the Diadem as the spectre of Succession War rears its ugly head.  Armies of fallen Numan Vandals, corrupted and mutated former soldier-clones of the Spinward Padishah Hegemony, raid, violate, pillage, and burn almost at will in the worlds of Man and the Padishah Hegemon has formally requested  assistance from the First Lord of the Sword Worlder Star League.  

Meanwhile the multi-racial Galactic Civilization centered on the ancient Citadel-Station of the Valar finds itself over-matched by a vile NECRO-COVENANT of Shadows, a black-mass army of cyber-wyrms and daemons striking from the darkness of the Galactic Rim.  Nearly overcome and facing an endless tide of death, madness, slavery, and terror, the Citadel Council breaks millennia of isolation and formally requests assistance from the wild and untamed 'Humon' ape-things from a mud-ball called ‘Dirt’.

Pursued by the Covenant's sinister agents, the desperate PRINCESS LIZRAEL of the Ael-Shi, daughter of the High Aeldar Aeldarin, races towards the barbarian world of Earth aboard her private Aether-ship, custodian of her father's Treaty of Alliance with the Earthers and a dowry of gifts to secure her own wedding to the Boy King, an arranged marriage that can save her people and restore Light and Hope to the free peoples of the Galaxy.

Meanwhile on Holy Terra, the pious High Pontifex Maximus suffers from strange premonitions and dream-visions of impending doom and grasping blood drenched shadows from the stars..

Void Stalker Class Battleship by garr0t

29 January 2015

Reactionary VS Conservative

So what is this Thomas Carlyle Club for Young Reactionaries, and how do I join?

Where I stand, and how I got here.

Happy New Year 2015!  Such as it is.  What am I the weather man?

Anyway, here's hoping for better year than last.

What would that look like?

Would it mean restoring the heir of the Stuart throne to Westminster, or Washington?  How about reforming the Holy Roman Empire?  At this point I'd settle for a little less progress, revolution, and degeneracy being shoved down my throat.

But its important not to place our hopes in this world, trust not in princes, let alone in politicians.  Our hope is in the next world, our true King is eternal, as is our true Kingdom.  Down here on Earth we must simply do as best as we can.

So, how did this recovering South-Western American,Yankee Neo-Conservative, Patriot, Liberty Crusader turn into a Paleo-Conservative, Authoritarian, Reactionary Monarchist?  One might say it was a journey of a lifetime, that I've always been here, or that I've always been moving here, that I've finally come home.  Or one might say that I've read too much, and seen too much, and put two and two together and gotten fifteen.

Something is wrong with the world, something deep, something just under the surface, just in our peripheral vision but never in focus.  Why do I feel like an alien in my own time and place?  What does it mean to be a man in a culture that despises manliness?  What does it mean to be an American, when the pillars of society and culture say that being American means anything, everything, nothing?  What if everything we know (as conventional red state 'conservative' Americans) is simply not just so?  What if Harvard and Yale and the Daily Kossacks are more authentically American than any of us red-neck Jesus-Landers?  Scary thought, no?

But let us begin at the beginning.

I was born and raised steeped in the red-state, Western US experience, at the tail end of the Cold War.  I remember watching Reagan's second inaugural on TV.  Seeing Red Dawn was a foundational experience, I remember 'earthquake' drills in Indiana, hiding under our desks.  For me, War-games is horror movie.  My great shame is not having been old enough to vote for old Ray-gun.  Seeing the Wall come down on TV was a life changing event.  Now, I was a precocious child, most of my playmates didn't care about these things.

Socrates is right, ignorance is bliss.

I was raised Mormon, at least initially, but like many of my generational cohort, I was raised in a broken home, bouncing between living with Mother and Father; attending Church only in fits and starts, early on experiencing faith as if I was at buffet of religiosity, a smorgasbord of traditions. I distinctly remember a fondness for the traditional and apostolic rites of Christianity, both Eastern and Western ,even then, but quite naturally, I rebelled.  Tired of bouncing between weltanschauungs both familiar and deeply alien (Hare Krishna, Dad, really?), and finally put off faith altogether by an experience with Sufism (no, I don't want to talk about my feelings, nor do I want to do transcendental meditation, I'm a teenage boy, thank you very much). I declared my independence, I said, I'm agnostic and I just can't bothered about this God question now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!

Naturally, this de facto atheism lead to many more errors.  I became a... shudder... Libertarian.  It seemed natural enough at the time, I was reading the Federalist Papers, and the Anti-Federalist Papers, and Common Sense lead to more Thomas Paine, and thence to John Stuart Mill, and Milton Friedman, and Ayn Rand, and so on and so forth.  At this time I was also immersed in the 90s anti-pinko, anti-Clinton milieu.  I read American Survival Guide and Soldier of Fortune like I should have been reading the Bible.  Then I read David Icke, and boy howdy do we ever need an Index Librorum Prohibitorum in this day and age, let me tell you.  Naive, I became convinced that the Gospels are a-historical, a sham.  I am probably going to hell.  So kids, let this be a warning.  Listen to your parents, don't read bad books, and eat your veggies.

Then I graduated from high school and found myself at the local community college, taking courses fitfully, just plain lost in the world.  This was Year of Our Lord 2001, September of that year, and well, you know.  So I joined the Army.  Seemed like the thing to do at the time.  I finished training just in time too, my unit crossed the border between Kuwait and Iraq as part of Operation Cobra II on 20 March, Year of Our Lord 2003.  You'd think that it was my time as an enlisted private soldier that knocked the wind out of Libertine jib, but sadly, that isn't so.  Like many of my fellow Soldiers, especially White Male soldiers from the American South or West, I could very easily reconcile military discipline with 'liberty', especially seeing as we where all professionals, volunteers, highly paid to be subject to UCMJ and the command of our officers.

No it was the 'real' world,  or at least the corporate world that slapped that stupid out of me.  Look, I know how fouled up the Army is, the dirtbags we have to sometimes carry to accomplish our missions, the sheer youth of everybody involved at the sharp end, yet somehow we got things done, in highly stressful situations, without the comforts of home or even the proper tools.  The civilian world is different, shit doesn't get done, when it does, its the same two or three people in the room carrying everyone else.  What is the difference?

That was a question that would haunt me for a long time.

It was around this time that I read something than changed my life.  Strangely, or perhaps not so strangely considering the effect of Heinlein in confirming my youthful dalliance with Libertarianism, it was a work of fiction.  SM Sirling's Dies the Fire or Emberverse series tells a story of a world where electricity and pneumatics stops working, meaning no gadgets, no internal combustion, no guns, no explosives, no steam, nothing fancier than hydraulics and spring power.  After the die off the strange get going, giving us a world of neo-gael witchy archers and US Marine cataphracts, and ex-mafia knights and militant monks and magick and mystery, visions and apparitions, quests, and blood, and thunder!  Its a rollicking good time and I highly recommend it.

As a long time survivalist I was terribly struck by the centrality of food to life, and the centrality of agriculture to food, and land to agriculture, and sheer physical labor involved when machines are not an option.  The need for many hands to make light work, and to fight to keep the sweat of your brow, meant that a nuclear family, even a single extended family is hideously vulnerable.  The only intelligible unit of survival is a community, a tribe.  And what binds a community together is a story, a myth, because men do not live by bread alone.

Then too, I'm reading The 5,000 Year Leap and I'm thinking, OK, I can reconcile the 'Myth of the West' (Christianity) with Classical Liberalism (ie the American Revolutionary movement and modern day Libertarianism).  Only one problem, all those obnoxious atheist liberals who happen to like property (Paul-bots), what claim to be the true inheritors of Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry.  And just go back and look at the the anti-Christian stuff that comes out of Jacobin, pro-French revolution wing of the founder's generation, frankly, they're not entirely wrong.  Dig a little deeper into the history of the Myth of the West, and one finds an even bigger problem with squaring the circle; Classical Liberalism is a Protestant project, and Protestantism is a product of the so called 'Enlightenment' that which also gives us modern 'Liberalism' aka Humanism, aka, Atheism.  Ooops.

Now I have no doubt that there are many good and believing folks of all manner of Protestant confessions, I have no doubt because I personally know this to be true, I grew up in just that sort of milieu!  So, what does a confused young man do when his personal project to make sense of his place in the world founders on the rocks of reality?  Why double-down of course!  Damn the torpedoes and ahead full steam!  I can square the circle if I just try hard enough, want it bad enough.  I grew up imbibing the myth of America, honoring the fathers that came before us, and is this not good and true and meet and right so to do?  But what if the Myth of America and the Myth of the West don't get along?

Never you mind!  I'll just look around for a form of Protestantism that still contains as much of the Myth of the West as is possible but still making peace with the Enlightenment, Modernity, and Classical Liberalism. At the same time mutating my now ill-fitting classical liberalism into a sort of national populism, just shy of ethno-nationalism, because I'm still enough of an un-self critical liberal to say that a propositional nation is possible.  Well it is, but it has to be one heck of proposition, like, say, believe in me and you shall have eternal life, that sort of thing.  The only successful multi-ethnic states have shared a religion... hint, hint...

As luck would have it, the place I was living just happened to be a hot-bed of just such a form of Protestantism.  The Anglican Church in North America is a break away sect of high-church, theologically conservative Episcopalians who could not abide openly gay clergy.  Womyn-priests sure, but gay priests we say nay!  So I think I've done it, victory at last!

But there remains a doubt.  Why should there be a Church of England?  On what Authority does it exist?  The King's?  But we don't have a King, and why do I care if Henry wanted an annulment?  Whatever do I have to Protest?  Do I want the laws of prayer and belief subject to majority vote?  Because that's working so well in my own country?  We just elected Barrack Obama for Christ's sake!  And look at this, there are so many Anglicans/Episcopalians converting to Catholicism, that the Pope is setting up an alternate structure within the Latin Roman Church just for them...

Well shit.  Oh, hey, I'm married now, and I've got a baby on the way, I'm going to be a daddy and I'd better figure this stuff out.

And then I read Bonald, and Moldbug, and Robert Filmer, and Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira, and, and... Well you get the idea.  So let's review.  Here I am, I have found modernity alienating since I was a child.  I remember being powerfully affected by JRR Tolkien, Homer, Virgil, by Arthur, Roland, Charles Martel, Beowulf, and Aragorn.  I remember being struck by the mystical relationship between the King as Imago-Christi to the people and the King as Father to the people and the land as a junior high school student.  I remember remarking to my best friend in high school, 'how can we develop Arete without a war or some danger to confront?'  I have nothing to Protest in the undiluted Myth of the West, well, let's be clear, in Roman Christendom, and everything to gain, up to and including my soul if I am very good and very sorrowful and repentant from now on.  Come on, let's all swim the Tiber, the water's fine!

Only I get to other side, and something smells off right away, but that's for next week's update.

28 January 2015

Standing by

The doctor is in, expect new content soon...

Bloody ungrateful bastards!

22 April 2012

Framework I

Welcome back, last time we spoke of foundational ideas, today we will explore the framework that is anchored on that foundation.  In review, the foundational ideas were; idea, story, war, and polity.  Today we will build out and up from there and erect a framework.  To what end?  Ah, good question you little closet Aristotelian you, to continue the analogy we are building a house, and that house is my current philosophy of life, the universe, and everything, my weltanschauung (yes Liebchen, there are German philosophers other than Nietzsche).  You see, I realize now that I have yet to really systematically examine the whole totality of what I think, believe, and feel.  I've thought about my thoughts of course (I am not a sheep), but never committed those thoughts to paper (or bits) that could be collated, organized, and referred back to.  Of 'course I may discover that my thoughts do not warrant such public display, or merit such labor, but for now I'm humoring myself.  And at least the exercise will get me writing.

Out of idea let us briefly consider two instances; Greek Philosophy and Ethical Monotheism.  These specific ideas were neighbors in time and space, and even at the time ideas cross pollinated with each other.  The Greeks were so greedy for foreign ideas (like English speakers are for foreign words) to incorporate in their grand systems of thought that had a word for it, synecretism.  One thing to keep in mind now, everything in philosophy, especially moral and political philosophy, has already been done by the Greeks.  Every variation, every morality, every political system, every way of looking at man and his condition.  Hell, philosophy is a Greek word.  Now, I could literally (no I mean literally, not figuratively), literally spend a lifetime studying, learning, thinking, and writing about the Greek philosophers and their philosophy, but I'm not going to to.  I don't have to, history has already done the work of winnowing down the philosophy of Greece to a manageable list.  Sturgeon's revelation is basically correct, at least 80% of everything is crap, and may safely be ignored.  Of those few that remain*, only one man's philosophy has not only survived, but thrived, been taken up into our inherited history and tradition and orthodoxy of the West; Aristotle.

What's so special about Aristotle?  Everything.  No really, go check out the wiki entry, I'll wait.  This is the man who invented logic, literary and dramatic criticism, and natural philosophy, and who developed accounts of epistemology, ethics, and metaphysics that are unrivaled to this day.  All modern philosophy fails when it is asked, 'what is it you explain that isn't explained better and more simply by Aristotle'.  Like politics, the Greeks did philosophy first, and did it better.  And if any believer in materialist scientism tries to tell you that 'science!' makes philosophy and metaphysics unnecessary, ask him this; why does the universe exist?  If he tells you 'because of the big bang', ask him why there was a big bang.  Even at its most honest and truthful, natural philosophy (this is all science! is) is only capable of describing the falling of dominoes.  When asked to find the cause of the falling dominoes (the universe) it is reduced to saying it just is, or positing an infinite number of dominoes, like the ancient cosmologies that were in the reduced to 'turtles all the way down'.  In the end, we must rely on Aristotelian metaphysical conceptions of teleology (end directedness) and hylomorphism (form and matter in one substance) to arrive at reason, free will, responsibility, the capacity for virtue in addition to base vices.  How do we know this?  Because every other attempt to create a philosophical groundwork for such has been an abject failure, resulting in either cultural, biological, or economic-historical determinism, or no account or explanation of free will at all.

The second instance we should consider is Ethical Monotheism.  The revealed word of G-d.  The Law.  It is well to consider that any account of law that includes a source of law other than Human Positive Law (law made by men, changeable by men) must posit a source for law other than man, and superior to man.  All human cultures have a religion and god(s), and if the Lord did not reveal himself, we would be obliged to make him up.  This is because religion serves a purpose for mankind, it is in man's nature to have gods, and if this wasn't true and good for us, we wouldn't have these things anymore than we have thumbs or reason.  Like man's tools and technology, religion is just as natural (within human nature, which is included in universal nature, aka 'nature' as usually used colloquially) as butterflies or supernovae.  Now of course, since I'm not a crazy mankind-hating environmentalist, I do not confuse the 'natural' for the 'good'.  Because of man's corrupt nature, things that should be good for us; reason, technology, appetites, virtues, and even religions can be corrupted and evil.  But remember evil is only the absence of good, the corruption of good.  So the existence of evil and corrupt religions, or religious leaders or movements within a religion, in no way discredits all of religion or specific religions any more the vice means there is no virtue.  What is important about Ethical Monotheism is that it is a doctrine of personal action, in a community context.  It is a concept of justice and fair play.  Love they neighbor as you love yourself, all else is commentary.  This an belief system for making just communities, free communities, good communities.  It is no accident that one of the primary models the American Founders kept in mind when framing our Constitution was the tribal confederation of Ancient Israel; governed by tribal councils, consensus, and judges.

If only there was a belief system that combined the best features of Greek Philosophical Metaphysics and Jewish Ethical Monotheism.  Oh wait, there is!  Its called Christianity and is the religious belief system of the West.  Welcome to Christendom.  What about Aristotle's special insights that I just got done calling the apex of Greek thought?  Oh, he gets updated by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica which is to this day the standard theological and metaphysical work of the Christian world.  Christianity is ours and it is good.  In as much as we have clung to her beliefs we have waxed strong and prosperous.  In as much as we have turned our backs oh her, we have wained and lost our vitality and riches.  Today we have almost completely abonded her, and while anyone can ignore reality, no one can long ignore the consenquences of ignoring reality.  Mark my words, this will end in tears and fire.

AS I PASS through my incarnations in every age and race,

I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.

We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.

We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.

With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.

When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know."

On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."

In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."

Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.

As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!

*The shortlist?  Pythagoras, Democritas (tho his 'atomic' theory is not as nearly as 'scientific' as some would have you believe), Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, Seneca, Aurelius, and Cicero (OK, Romans, but I cheat, if you're not cheating, you're not trying!)

17 April 2012


Hello World.  Welcome to this space, again.

My name is Joshua Doc Shaw and this is my Web Log.  My rebooted Web Log since I haven't posted anything in years.  Well, if you're wondering, much has happened to me in the meantime.  I got married, had a daughter, changed jobs, and more.  So here I am, years later, wondering what happened to my desire to write and get published. 

The most important thing about writing is to actually write, and so I remembered my old blog.  It also helps to have something to say.  Which brings us to this post's title, 'Foundations'.  What will this Blog be about?

Well, many things, since I'm an eclectic sort of guy. 

First, the unifying theme of my thinking is the primacy of ideas, of fundamental ideas, of Philosophy and Religion.  Ideas have consequences, they shape how we interact with the world.  Ideas like Philosophy and Religion are just as important in these scientific latter days as they were for our ancestors, if not more so.  Consider, from a socio-biological point of view, Philosophy and Religion must serve a purpose that increased the survival chances for the humans that use those tools.  Now consider that the combination of Philosophy and Religion of the Western Civilisation (which includes Science by the way) must be objectively better than all others since Western Civilisation is that much more advanced and powerful.  To turn the saying around, Right makes Might.  So what then, is the Religious-Philosophical system of the West?  This is not a difficult question, but the answer is most unpleasant to the secular mind; Orthodox, Catholic, Apostolic Christianity, Thomistic-Aristotelian Scholasticism, and Natural Philosophy (Science!).  So the secular materialist has deliberately discarded two legs of the mental tripod required to make the West what it was.

Second, as a consequence of the primacy of idea and the medium of language, through which we understand the world, is the importance of Story.  We understand the world through ideas, but we understand ourselves through stories, the stories we tell ourselves about ourselves.  If men are to live together as men and not as crabs in a bucket we must have good stories to serve as our measuring stick, our ruler.  Man does not live by bread alone, change his ideas, his stories, and his ass will follow.  Note, this is an argument for virtue, as classically understood, not necessarily cleanliness or sterility.  Life is down and dirty, and no one gets out alive.  If you don't get dirt and blood on your hands once in a while, you're doing it wrong.  I for one adore the uncensored, original Grimm's Fairy Tales.  But if the dirty-ness does not serve a greater purpose, then what is the point?  Dirt for dirt's sake is an empty phrase, give me dirt for better contrasting the good, the true, and the beautiful.

Third, as a consequence of our alieness to each other, our inability to understand each other's language, culture, to judge each other's earnesty and intent, and our existentially different and threatening Religious-Philosophical-Political assumptions and conclusions about the world, warfare is _the_ defining feature of Human experience.  In fact I would go so far as to say that 'Peace is a hypothetical state of affairs whose presence has been deduced from the fact that there are intervals between wars' (if someone else hadn't already said it).  This will only change when A) the state of nature that prevails in the society of states is replaced by a global sovereign and B) the civilization of the world are united by a single culture and language and philosophical-religious system.  Whether or not this state of affairs is, or can be, virtuous and desirable I leave to the reader.

Finally, since warfare is the default state of relations of mankind as a whole, the State is necessary, like fire.  For it is the State, unique amongst all the forms by which humans can organize themselves, that reliably wins wars.  Or at least survives loosing them.  But the State, like all the other tools made by men, is meant to serve their needs, not to master men.  That method by which a ship of state is piloted, that we call government and politics, and it is a matter of literal life and death.  Thusly are those who attack the ship of state, seeking to break up her timbers and 'free' man into the swirling waters of the raging seas of fate are called he general enemy of mankind.  Yet also must those who wish to seize the helm and reduce the crew to servile things that were once men be resisted. 

In conclusion, another name for this Blog could have been the Middle Way, but riffing off my middle name and my favorite pulp hero just couldn't be resisted.  Remember, virtue exists as a median between two extremes of two much and not enough of a good.  Evil has no existence of its own, only privation, just as the darkness is the absence of light.  All that is happening has happened before, there is nothing new under the sun.  And while Winter _is_ Coming, after Winter comes the Spring.  Thus, hope springs eternal.

16 April 2012

Testing 1, 2, 3... Is this thing on?

Testing a slightly changed format for a blog reboot... watch this space.

20 November 2009

Here's an idea, do your gorram job!

Every week, the Senate routinely passes legislation that is never voted on, never debated, and rarely, if ever, read by the full Senate. Now surely, you say, this process is reserved for non-controversial bills like renaming post offices or honoring the Super Bowl champions, right?

Wrong. The “World’s Greatest Deliberative Body” regularly passes major legislation that creates new programs and authorizes billions in new spending without you knowing until after the fact.

The game works this way: the leaders of both parties send an email and recorded phone message to each Senate office notifying them they would like to pass certain bills sometime that day by unanimous consent. If no senator calls his or her party leader to object, it usually passes at the close of business that day without a recorded vote. Sometimes, I am given just a few minutes to read lengthy bills, and unless I pick up the phone to object (“hold”), it is considered passed by the US Senate.

I would be willing to bet that few senators even take the time to read the request, let alone the bill. Worse, the decision is usually left to an unelected staff member.

And they expect you to find out by noting the bill’s passage in the congressional record on the day after passage.

They call this process “unanimous consent” when in reality it is consent by default.
The US Senate, too lazy to debate. Fuck!

19 November 2009

Inre: 'I’m not sure why there’s a resistance to proclaiming oneself libertarian'

In the comments of this story about Republican primary challenges by Texas TEA Party protesters,

Bill589 said...

I run into many ‘conservatives, but . . . ’, who are actually better described as ‘right libertarians’. I’m not sure why there’s a resistance to proclaiming oneself libertarian; my guess is it’s mostly from skewed press over the years.

To which I reply:

Because Left-Libertarians, Minarchists, Anarchists, and Libertines give the whole Libertarian stream of thought a black name amongst Nationalists or Culturalists of any stripe.

Libertarian's hostility to the concept of the State, of standing armies and military spending, the seeming inability of Libertarianism to find any grounds from which to condemn infanticide, hostility to America's Christian identity, the studied refusal to recognize vital national interests, the rejection of preemptive national defense, Libertarian paeans to unrestricted immigration and hostility to border security and labor market restrictions, Libertarian praise for Jefferson Davis and condemnation of Lincoln...

These are why Conservatives are uncomfortable with Libertarianism. Liberty implies Duty; but Libertarianism tends to call Duty Slavery.

Yes, Libertarianism is a wide stream, as this blog indicates, but after having canceled my 'Liberty' subscription and stopped reading 'Reason' [out of disgust] I have come to point of saying, 'if this is Libertarianism, then I am a Statist and be damned'.