THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 461, March 23, 2008
"The greatest appeal of socialism is that its advocates
always imagine themselves at the top of the pecking order"
Send Letters to email@example.com
Note: We received a long exchange of letters from E.J. Totty and "Julius No" (Robert Jackman) about ethanol, pro and con. I simply didn't have the strength to put these into shape for this issue. Perhaps next issue.Editor
I've got news for you, Mr. Graves.
You see, in my line of work I correspond with plenty of Gen X and Gen Y people, and they are just as greedy for government bennies as anyone in fact, it seems they are even more greedy, not just "begging" for universal health care but haughtily asserting that anyone against it must be some knuckle-dragging Neanderthal.
In fact, it seems that haughtily asserting stupid ideas is a predominant characteristic of the younger generations.
So before you go pointing out the mote in my generation's eye, consider the 2x4 in your own.
Wow, over 2500 words all directed at little old me. I'm impressed. Let's look at several of those words. I won't bother with saying who said what; it's all pretty much in the same vein. I'm evil, I'm sick, I'm twisted and I'm a bigot all for getting bent out of shape at the prospect of having to see great gobs of my money stolen from me to pay for the Boomers Social Security checks. That's cool; we Gen X types are used to being called names by Boomers because we don't like the Beatles or whatever other intolerable sins we have perpetuated against our elders.
One fellow reminded me that it was Boomers that founded the Libertarian Party. Gee, thanks for that. The party that sucked up my money, time and health and in return I got told by you Boomer Libertarians that we were doing it all wrong. Of course it's not like any of you Boomers wanted to do the work, you just wanted to be backseat drivers and tell us how not to do it. Instead of helping out you all spent your time sending newsletters around and tried convincing us that we could skip out on paying taxes just by filing the right forms. Thanks loads for that.
Another one tells me that it is a faulty premise to blame all members of a group for the actions of the majority of that group. No shit Sherlock. I didn't do that. Boomers just take everything too darned personally. I didn't blame Susan or any of the rest of you for what the majority of your generation did. I just pointed out that it was the majority of your generation that has been voting during the time period where government has been becoming more and more socialist. Sure a small percentage of your generation has been either voting against that or not voting at all but by and large the Republican Parties shift from small government conservatives to big government neo-cons has been happening while your generation has been voting. There are a crap load of you Boomers and every advertising and political movement has pandered to your wishes for the last 40 years. The shift of the political center to the left during your generation's ascendancy is not a coincidence.
Most of you tried to point out that the big ticket socialist items came into play before you Boomers started voting. Again, that's true. However your generation certainly didn't try to reverse those items and it wasn't until the 70's when Social Security became "the Third Rail of American Politics". Remind me who was the largest over 20 demographic in the 70's? Was it Boomers? I think it was. Greedy Boomers who didn't want to lose out on a free lunch have made it impossible to even discuss the idea that Social Security is wrong and needs to be eliminated. Now every politician dances carefully when the subject of Social Security comes up.
Most of you tried to claim that a majority of Boomers don't vote. I'm not sure who you think is doing most of this voting but it sure seems like a whole lot of people are into it. One of the big complaints about my generation is that most of us don't vote. So if we cut out most of the X and Y generations and then, like you Boomer apologists want to do, remove a majority of Boomers from the ranks of voters who are the ones voting to create the socialist police state which we all live in? The 70 plus crowd? Where do you think the billions of dollars in campaign contributions are coming from? Grandma's Social Security check? Get real; most of the voters and contributors are Boomers because it's the Boomers who are set to benefit most from government's largess. The younger generations know they are screwed and have given up hope of getting their share of the American Dream.
One letter I got pointed out that many Gen X and Gen Y types are pretty darned greedy about those gubiment goodies as well. Well of course they are, who raised them to be like that? Martians? Androids? No, it was the Boomers who taught us those vital life lessons. Well, actually it wasn't our parents who did much of the teaching; they shipped us off to day care as soon as they could so they could go on living their dual income lives. We learned important lessons there, like don't expect family to be there for you, but you can damned sure expect the government to do all the caring you might need. We have been victimized on both ends by the Boomers. Denied a stable stay at home moms influence in our youth and seen as a resource to fund Boomers in their old age. Gee, can you feel all that love.
So again I admit to being pissed off at the Boomers. Why not rage against them. After all, if I pick a random sampling of articles from this very publication I can find plenty of examples from my Boomer elders on how to deal with political disenfranchisement. Get pissed, call people names, lump your enemies all together into one group and call them evil. All valuable lessons learned from my years of reading these pages, passed down from the very Boomers who founded this great movement. Thank you for those valuable lessons.
Ernest Hancock asks for your help, please
The next LPNews will start hitting mailboxes in a week. This ½ page ad is the starting gun for a full on debate about the role of the Libertarian Party of the United States of America in the coming political revolution that we are just starting to see the beginnings of.
I have been a libertarian freedom activist for over a decade in a half and have been a close witness to the results of the current path the LPUS has been on for most of that time, and have engaged in advocating active engagement against the 'Bad Guys' on a national level while demonstrating what can be done on a local level that regularly has had national effect.
In 2004 Libertarians from around the country were first introduced to what me and my supporters thought would be the most productive direction the LPUS should take. The effort for National Chair in 2004 was our introduction at the convention in Atlanta and was the beginning of our current effort. The production of the Western Libertarian Alliance newspaper that was distributed then was an example of opinion and ideas that would encourage the freedom movement towards the effective advancement of freedom. The complete newspaper in PDF can be read here
By 2006 it was very clear that the Libertarian Party of the United States of America was no longer an effective tool in the advancement of freedom. The most productive individuals, generous benefactors, state Libertarian Parties and organizations were not being served by the LPUS' existence. Coordinated efforts to strip the LPUS of its most effective traits did more damage and left the field wide open for a filling of the void only months later by Ron Paul's campaign (which I strongly support as another very effective mind freeing effort that serves us all). Again, I did my best to make my positions very clear in an off Presidential Election year. I hoped to gain even more credibility by being very clear about what I saw was in our near and distant future and what the choices were that needed to be made and why. My message going into, and at, that convention was [this]
My efforts, and those of my supporters, for the May 2008 Denver LPUS Convention is to make it very clear what we envision the role of the Libertarian Party to be in order for it to have very powerful influence in the advocacy and the attainment of liberty. My personal efforts, and those of others that share my goal of individual freedom, have demonstrated the ability to have an international impact using the uncompromising freedom message so closely associated with libertarianism and the Libertarian Party. But the association of freedom advocacy with the Libertarian Party is quickly fading and the use of the LPUS as an effective tool in the coming revolution between America's ears is rapidly diminishing. At http://ernesthancock.org you'll learn of my personal motivations for seeking this particular office of potential importance and what will be accomplished should I gain the support of the majority of Libertarians attending the national Convention.
Those that know me and have worked with me on past efforts.... I ask that you please take the time to endorse my effort here. We have just completed the formatting needed and I hope that you would take the time to provide potential supporters with information that you think they should be made aware of as they begin to view my site for information about the National Chairmanship of the LPUS after the publication of the above ad.
This year we are doing our best to make sure that each delegate is fully informed of their choices before the convention with mailings and video productions. I may be contacting some of you for a short interview to help make several points that I feel are important. At the convention we will bring the expected enthusiasm (and show) that has come to be associated with Arizona Activism.
In the end, no matter what the vote totals are, it will be very clear what direction the Libertarians in Convention have chosen and why. It is this information that is of the greatest value to so many that have invested so much at a time so critical.
You can also support my effort with money
Comments on my article
I supplied an email address for comments on my article about "What's the True Source of our Right to Bear Arms?". This address goes through my spam reduction service. Unfortunately I did not update it and I believe some messages to me may have been treated like spam. If anyone sent me comments they can try again at the same address and it should get through now.
It's funny reading what people pick up on in these articles. In this case it was the sentence about a useful death. If I am to be quoted, I wish I had polished the quote a little more first! It really should have read, "There is no more useful death, than one met in the act of killing tyrants."
I understand this article reads a bit extreme; sorry if it offends. The older I get, the more I shun euphemism. Plain speaking for me, these days. Anyway I am exercising yet another right, the right to say what I damn well please. I'm impressed TLE actually published it; Rockwell didn't...
Freedom Summer Wyoming
Hi. Those of you interested in both freedom and Wyoming may be interested in our event 19-23 June in Newcastle, Wyoming.
We're having all the usual Free State Wyoming type things camping, shooting, barbecue, discussions about liberty, and even some educational stuff involving model rockets, telescopes, what have you.
Freedom Summer Wyoming
Copper, the key to defeating the NWO: Equipment disassembly for copper or just plain fun!
Mayhap the the very thing to save our economy (or start a new one), if we don't collect the copper just to sell to china (think about that as well, that it would actually deprive China, and others, of the means to do a very lot of what they do, that is import to us to destroy us), but use it for our own welfare, that is to start hoarding it so we can coin it for our own use as a means to starting to side step the feds.
Copper is an essential industrial metal. We really need to get behind this folks, and spread the idea far and wide. Creating a corner on copper, is exactly the thing that might bring the NWO to its knees. Below is the way to collect it for free or for just labor.
Arthur C. Clarke, RIP
I can only speak of my brief intersection with the thought and works of Arthur C. Clarke in the form of one of Stanley Kubrick's films. It was brief, as brief as 2001: A Space Odyssey anyhow, and it was a life-changing experience.
As any recent recipient of public schooling knows, serious questions of philosophy, indeed philosophy proper, is never discussed until college. Until that time, the vulnerable minds of youth are left to the devices of whatever nonsense the teachers should choose to peddle. In addition to truly awakening my interest in what movies are, and can be (in a long chain of succession, I had to go through Kubrick and Clarke to get to Scorsese, Cassavetes and Tarkovksy) 2001 was, for me, a kind of awakening to the question of existence itself. I rejected its thesis, but the awakening itself was the important thing; I began to think on things that consumed all my attention for months at a time, and it was all I was really interested in. I'd never heard the word "ontology" before, but its field of study was awakened in me by that collaboration. For that I shall be eternally grateful, regardless of Clarke's socialism.
In regard to the Letter from Kendrick McPeters with Reply from L. Neil Smith, I don't think that Congress should be adjourned. Both houses of Congress should be required to sit (quietly and awake) in a joint session while the Speaker of the House reads all the laws. Perhaps somebody can go around with a feather at the end of a long stick to wake those members of Congress that nod off like they used to do in churches. (Of course they might need more than one person for this task; listening to the text of laws being read has got to be a real insomnia cure.)
Maybe all the Cabinet secretaries should be required to read all of the regulations for their department under the same rules.
To which Kendrick McPeters Replied:
Dana Majewski, in regard to my "read the laws" proposal, suggests that all of our Congresscritters should be required to sit quietly in joint session while the laws are being read. I think this is an excellent idea. However, as long as they are present, why not give them something useful to do? I'm thinking they each could have an electronic voting device, which could only be used to repeal the law currently being read. Thus, when 218 Representatives and 51 Senators register their "repeal" votes, a large gong would be struck, and the Speaker would formally declare the law null, void, and repealed... and then move on to the next law.
But why should Congress have all the fun? Why not let the law get "gonged" by the public, American Idol style? All we'd need is one phone line for "repeal it." Everyone calling in would be required to enter their Socialist Insecurity number, along with a PIN they'd been issued by their local election commission. A law would officially be repealed by the public, as soon as "repeal" calls equivalent to the number of voters who cast votes for the sitting President, are received. (That would be a threshhold of 39,920,562 today.)
Dana also suggests using long sticks with feathers on the end to wake up Congresscritters who fall asleep listening to the law being read. This is a sound idea, although, in my opinion, tasers would be much more effective at combatting the problem of sleepy solons. Perhaps we could have an escalating response? Feathers for first offense; a water pistol for the second offense; and tasering afterwards? It works for me!
Finally, Dana brought up the matter of regulations, suggesting that Cabinet secretaries should be required to read the ones they enforce. I like that idea, too. But, with so many Cabinet agencies empowered, it seems to be spreading the misery around, somewhat. My counterproposal is that they be read by the President, who is at the head of these departments, and free to repeal by the mere stroke of his pen any executive rule or order that he doesn't like. A special added bonus would be the entertainment value of watching a barely articulate President (not to name any names here!) stumble and fumble his way through all the "big words" in the Federal Register!
Thanks, Dana, for your insightful suggestions! And if anyone else out there has ideas for further improvements, I'd be delighted to hear them.
I don't know what the rules let us do, but we need to run this story.
L. Neil Smith