Blog

The Carl Sagan Case Against Democracy
We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology.
– Carl Sagan, BrainyQuote
How has science and technology advanced when “we the people” never “voted” for such a thing to occur?
Democracy advocates claim that ‘if we don’t vote on X through the political process, we will have no influence on X, and X will benefit only the very few’.
Does anyone think Seinfeld would have been funnier if script writing had been put to a popular vote? Would printers work better if people who know nothing about printers voted on how printers should be made? Computers? Houses? Cell phones? Cars? Airplanes? Food?
Allowing tens of millions of uninformed people to shape anything is an unwise policy, especially when they pay no price for being wrong.
In the free market, people succeed by pleasing the mass of consumers. In government, politicians succeed by vilifying people of goodwill and rewards he who enrages the masses of ignorant voters.
If the government didn’t have a monopoly on security, only rich people would be able to have security just like when the government got out of other businesses, the only cars produced were limousines, the only clothes produced were tuxedos and the only food produced was foie gras
- Michael Malice, July 26th, 2022
John Bolton Joins W. Bush and the Cheneys as Heroic Inspiration to Millions of American Liberal Democrats
Donald “America First” Trump’s National Security Advisor calls for regime change in Russia.
*all the pussy-hat ladies swoon*

AOC is 100% Wrong About Inequality
…[I]n 1800 AD, 95% of the world was destitute, living in what we’d now consider extreme poverty. In 1900 AD, about 75% were.
Now, maybe 9% of people are, while nine out of ten people live above extreme poverty. In 1950, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan were very poor. Singer would have said we have duties to give our extra income to their citizens. In 2020, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan are very rich—indeed, the average person in Singapore is now richer than the average American. Singer today would say the Japanese, Koreans, etc.,have duties to give their extra income away. But we should ask, how did the people in these recently poor countries go from being the kinds of people Singer thinks ought to be helped to the kinds of people Singer thinks ought to give help?
The answer: It’s not as though Japan and Korea went from being full of people who need help to people who can help because anyone listened to Singer. Rather, they became rich precisely because people ignored Singer’s advice. Over the past 60 years, people in already rich countries bought toys, transistor radios, stereos, video game consoles, VCRs, DVD players, Blu-ray players, smartphones, automobiles, electronics, and a wide range of other morally insignificant luxury goods they didn’t need from these countries. The result wasn’t that their people starved while their economies went on making useless trinkets. The result was instead that their people were liberated from poverty and joined the ranks of the rich.
Today, China is starting to move toward being a middle- income country. Some parts of China are quite rich, while others remain poor. But it was only when China partly liberalized, and when Americans and others started buying so many unneeded, morally insignificant luxury goods from China, that China finally started to escape extreme poverty.
There are a few historical examples of countries avoiding sudden collapse or utter chaos thanks to handouts from wealthier countries, but there are no examples of countries having sustained, poverty-ending growth as a result of such handouts. Rather, all of the rich countries grew rich by participating in the world market economy, by producing things others wanted at prices they could afford to pay. Historically, the thing that eradicates extreme destitution is not throwing money at destitution, but throwing money into the very forms of commerce Singer wants to eliminate and regards as morally wrong.
– Jason Brennan, Ph.D., Why It’s OK to Want to Be Richp. 153-5
My Twitter Follower Count Has Been Artificially Locked at 63k for 4 months.
I wonder if the new regime will continue the same as before.
I mean it’s not like he’s going to fire all the “former” FBI agents and CIA officers who work there, right?
“Acquitted Conduct Sentencing”
That’s how they did the surviving Branch Davidians.
The Supreme Court to rule on it. Lords have mercy.
Whose betting they go ahead and legalize it? Same group of enemies of the public as just did this too:
Amid the many appeals the Supreme Court declined to hear today was another case in which an armed homeowner was shot and killed on his own property by police after they went to the wrong house. Cops got qualified immunity pic.twitter.com/Axio9LiQve
— Lawrence Hurley (@lawrencehurley) October 3, 2022
They haven’t just given cops a license to kill and nearly full protection from criminal prosecution, you can’t even sue them. It what sense is it true that government employees are just “citizens” of the country doing their democratic duty to serve truth and justice. They sure seem like lawless, totalitarian, criminal thugs united only around their hatred of such values as those.
Scott Horton on Kennedy Nation 10/4/2022
Russia-Ukraine, Biden’s dementia: