Category: Politics

You Guide to Today’s Election

Throughout much of the country people are rushing to (OK, trickling into) their designated state worship facilities. Here they will perform the statist pagan ritual of voting. What is voting? I’ll let Uncle Spidy explain it :

Yes, you’re effectively going to the polls to say you want to watch television while everybody else is voting to fuck you with switchblades. To that end I have prepared a voting guide for my fellow Minnesotans.

The only notable race being discussed is the Minneapolis mayoral race. If you’re going to vote please note that the only candidate on that long list of candidates that’s awesome is Kurtis Hanna. He’s running under the Pirate Party banner and was the executive director of Minnesota National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (MNNORML). Having a mayor that wants to change intellectual property laws and legalize cannabis is about as awesome as you can get. Also, he’s a personal friend of mine, which automatically makes him awesome.

Denizens of Minneapolis and St. Paul both get to experience ranked choice voting. What is ranked choice voting. It’s a system that allows you to pick candidates in order of preference. I could spend a great deal of time explaining how it works but I’ll cut through the bullshit and give you the short answer. Ranked choice voting is a scam that makes people believe their third party candidate can win an election. In actuality ranked choice voting is nothing more than a more complicated way for the two parties to maintain their power (or, in the case of Minneapolis, for the Democrats to maintain their power since the Republicans haven’t won a mayoral election there since the ’60’s).

What else can I say? Honestly, stay home. You chances of getting killed in a car accident on your way to the polling place is far greater than the chance that your vote is going to make any difference. As I said yesterday, we’re not voting our way out of this. Instead of wasting time at the polling place do something productive. Read a book, look into agorism, go to the range, or wash your hair. Let’s stop playing their game and play our own. After all, it is the 5th of November. We should be celebrate the holiday appropriately, which involves drinking and bonfires, not voting.

The Left-Right Paradigm

OK everybody, it’s time for Uncle Anarchy to tell you a story. Way back in 1789 the French were were having themselves a little revolution. The rebels weren’t happy with King Louis XVI because he was acting like an asshole. Before actual war broke out the people tried to address the issue at the National Assembly. Those who favored the king sat on the right of the assembly and those who favored revolution sat on the left side of the assembly. Thus the left-right political paradigm was born. After the National Assembly was replaced by a Legislative Assembly the people who favored change sat on the left, the people who favored constitutionalism sat on the right, and those boring moderates sat between the two more interesting sides.

I told you that story so we discuss the left-right paradigm as it exists here in the United States. Somehow the left became associated with Democrats and the right became associated with Republicans. This makes no sense when you consider how the left-right paradigm came into being. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are supporters of the king (the current system) and both of them support keeping things as they are instead of implementing radical changes.

I believe this country needs to reconsider how it uses the left-right paradigm. Here is my proposal: both the Republican and Democrats should be placed on the right side of the political spectrum while libertarians, communists, anarchists, and other groups that favor radical changes should be placed on the left side of the political spectrum. The Republicans and Democrats both want to maintain the current power structure while the other groups I mentioned want to change it.

To my Democrat friends I kindly ask that you stop calling yourself leftists. You guys aren’t fit to be on the side of revolutionaries and, frankly, you’re giving us a bad name. Go sit by your Republican friends on the right. While us revolutionaries discuss actual changes you two can continue pretending you hate one another while agreeing on everything besides totem animal and party color.

Put the Pedal to the Metal

The government “shutdown” is over, the debt ceiling has been raise, and the Affordable Care Act can be funded. Obama received everything he wanted while the Republicans received nothing. Business as usual has returned to the land.

Here’s the thing we should all consider. The politicians in Washington DC wasted our time trumping up political anger just to do the same thing they have been doing since forever, raising the debt ceiling. I think it’s time that we admit that the debt ceiling is nothing more than a figment of our imagination. To that end I hereby support the elimination of the debt ceiling.

It’s time that we get rid of all these artificial barriers between the United States and complete economic collapse. Let’s put the pedal to the metal and give everybody what they want and give it to them good and hard. Remove the debt ceiling? Pass it. Completely socialized healthcare? Pass it. $20.00 per hour minimum wage? Pass it. Free welfare and education for all? Pass it. Pass everything and anything that can drive this country over the economic cliff.

I’m not a fan of half-assing things and this country has been half-assing economic collapse for over half of a century. The time to step up and do a proper job is now. The sooner we get to the collapse stage the sooner we can begin recovering.

The National Debt

During this entire “shutdown” drama one topic continues to be brought up again and again: the national debt. Fiscally conservative circles are giving the Republicans a lot of credit for refusing to pass a budget that funds the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Their reason for this is a belief that funding the ACA will increase the national debt even further, which is true (since the United States is maintaining a deficit any additional spending will increase the national debt). On principle I agree that further increasing the national debt is a bad idea. Practically speak, decreasing the national debt at this point is meaningless.

The national debt is hovering close to $17 trillion. At this point the United States is insolvent. Putting this into perspective, this national has already reach the point many fiscally irresponsible individuals reach when they received a credit card with a high spending limit. The amount of outstanding credit exceeds the debtor’s ability to repay. No matter what the federal government does it will never be able to repay $17 trillion.

One must now ask whether or not attempts to curtail the national debt are meaningful. Honestly, I don’t think they are. At this point the government might as well buy anything and everything it can. Anything of value (that is to say, anything that isn’t perishable) should be transferred to another entity to protect it from seizure when the time comes to declare bankruptcy. If you’ve already overextended your credit limit you might as well go for broke and get everything you can.

I’m of the mindset that there is nothing that can be done to prevent the sinking of the Titanic. Instead, I’m focusing my time on getting to the life boat, loading as many people as I can onto the life boat, and getting the life boat as far away from the sinking ship as possible. Going below deck and trying to weld patches onto the gigantic hole of national debt is futile.

The Only Pain Incurred by the Shutdown is Intentional

As this “shutdown” continues we see more demonstrations of its arbitrary nature. First of all, this isn’t a shutdown. A shutdown would imply a complete end to all government provided services. Instead, what we have, is an inconvenience. The only things being shutdown are ones that cause direct harm or inconvenience to the general public. In fact, as demonstrated by the blockage of a World War II memorial, the government has actually invest time and resources into this inconvenience. Many parks and memorials that are unmanned or maintain a minimal staff are now surrounded by police officers who are tasked with keeping everybody out.

If that didn’t make it apparent that this shutdown is a direct swipe at the general population this should:

The IRS is still collecting taxes during the government shutdown, but it isn’t sending refunds — and it also has stopped complying with a subpoena to turn over documents to members of Congress who are investigating the agency’s targeting of tea party groups.

The government will still pay people to rob you at gunpoint but it won’t pay people to send you refunds or documents that have been subpoenaed, which should slap the bigwigs in the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with contempt of Congress.

Instead of referring to this “shutdown” as a shutdown we should call it what it really is: a giant dick waving competition. Right now the Republicans and Democrats are pulling out tape measures and seeing who has the longer dick. Because both sides are coming up short they’ve decided to take their anger out on all of us. The only question we should be asking is, why the fuck do we take these children seriously and allow them to run our lives?

Glitch or Design

The debate over the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been heating since the House voted to defund the law. Of all the revelations that have come to light regarding the law I believe this one may be the most telling:

WASHINGTON — Some families could get priced out of health insurance due to what’s being called a glitch in President Barack Obama’s overhaul law. IRS regulations issued Wednesday failed to fix the problem as liberal backers of the president’s plan had hoped.

[…]

The affordability glitch is one of a series of problems coming into sharper focus as the law moves to full implementation.

Starting Oct. 1, many middle-class uninsured will be able to sign up for government-subsidized private coverage through new health care marketplaces known as exchanges. Coverage will be effective Jan. 1. Low-income people will be steered to expanded safety-net programs. At the same time, virtually all Americans will be required to carry health insurance, either through an employer, a government program, or by buying their own plan.

Bruce Lesley, president of First Focus, an advocacy group for children, cited estimates that close to 500,000 children could remain uninsured because of the glitch. “The children’s community is disappointed by the administration’s decision to deny access to coverage for children based on a bogus definition of affordability,” Lesley said in a statement.

I’m left wondering if this is a glitch or by design. A number of my posts have been dedicated to the states are on the homeless and the fact that the state has no interest in helping those with nothing to steal. I would find it surprising if the (ACA) wasn’t specifically designed to prevent very poor individuals from obtaining healthcare. If they are allowed to obtain healthcare that means the state would have to spend resources on them, which is not something it has a history of doing.

Washington DC runs on corporate dollars. The ACA was the result of large health insurance companies buying legislation that mandated every American become customers. It was never about helping those in need, that was just the line of bullshit fed to us to drum up public support. From the beginning the ACA was about enriching the wealthy bastards that have been shoveling money into the pockets of “representatives” for almost a century.

You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means

Poor old Harry Reid, he seems to have become confused once again. During some debate on some energy bill Mr. Reid decided to call supposed members of the Tea Party anarchists:

Reid (D-Nev.) said Tea Party Republicans are preventing progress on an energy efficiency bill by offering amendments on ObamaCare and other unrelated issues.

“We’re diverted totally from what this bill is about. Why? Because the anarchists have taken over,” Reid said on the Senate floor. “They’ve taken over the House and now they’ve taken over the Senate.

“People who don’t believe in government — and that’s what the Tea Party is all about — are winning, and that’s a shame.”

This isn’t the first time Mr. Reid has made this mistake. Between May or this year and now he still hasn’t picked up a dictionary to find out what the word “anarchist” actually means. The word is a combination of the greek ἀν- (an-), meaning without, and ἀρχός (archos), meaning leader or ruler. Therefore, an anarchist is somebody who opposes rulers, not just a person who disagree with your political ideology. Members of Congress create decrees and use force against anybody who disobeys. That’s what a ruler is, somebody who attempts to make you obey his or her commands through the threat of force.

Don’t get me wrong, the fact that my political philosophy is used as an insult in Washington DC pleases me. It lets me know that I’m on the right path.

Another Reason Why the GOP is a Joke

There’s no two ways to put this, the Republican Party (GOP) is dying. Actually, the GOP is already dead, it’s advocates simply don’t know it yet. I think the major turning point for the GOP was when it began to embrace religious fanaticism. We live in a post-Enlightenment world, religion doesn’t count for what it once did, and anybody trying to implement religious laws in the Western world is in for a bad time. Not satisfied with merely adopting religious zealotry, the GOP has also gone out of its way to adopt some of the most ironic politicians. Take Tony Sutton, the former chair of the Minnesota Republican Party. The GOP constantly advertises itself as the party of fiscal responsibility so one can only laugh when the chair of the Minnesota Party files for bankruptcy:

A hard-charging former state Republican Party chairman whose constant refrain to DFLers and even GOP lawmakers was “live within your means” has declared personal bankruptcy, the latest twist in one of the most dramatic political downfalls in recent state history.

At the height of his power, Tony Sutton demanded that Republican legislators oppose all tax increases and keep state spending strictly in line with revenue. Few realized it at the time, but the GOP’s finances under Sutton’s management were a shambles, and the same scenario was playing out in his personal life.

Sutton and his wife, Bridget Sutton, an Inver Grove Heights school board member and former Republican operative, say they owe $2.1 million, including $70,000 of credit card debt, $20,000 in federal student loans, unpaid state and federal taxes, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in unsecured personal loans to cover business expenses. At the time they filed, the Suttons had no life or health insurance.

If this was an isolated incident it wouldn’t be a big deal but it seems GOP politicians are constantly getting caught in situations where they practice what they preach against. There’s no hope for a party when it’s higher ups aren’t ideologically consistent. Any plan that involves the Republican Party should be abandoned and a plan B put into action.

Has the Ideological Purge Begun for the Free State Project

The idea behind the Free State Project is a noble one. Get enough people to move to New Hampshire so that the entire governmental body can be overtaken by advocates of liberty. I give the project credit for creativity and optimism but the execution of the idea has been lackluster. One of the ironies of the Free State Project, in my opinion, is its reliance on a board to make major decisions. Small groups of people having unilateral decision making power seems to be the exact opposite of what the Free State Project is trying to achieve. Yesterday the outcome of granting a small group of people power was demonstrated. Chris Cantwell, a rather fiery participant who I believes suffers a from an asshole complex, was booted out of the Free State Project by its board:

Dear Chris,

The FSP Board met last night to discuss your situation and what to do. Our decision is stated below, which includes our reasoning.

Whereas Chris Cantwell has made the following public statements, been offered the opportunity to retract, and has refused to do so: “It’s a terribly unpopular thing to say, but the answer, at some point, is to kill government agents,” and “any level of force necessary for anyone to stop any government agent from furthering said coercion [tax collection in the context of funding the salaries of all government employees] is morally justifiable…”

Whereas the FSP Board believes this view exceeds the right of self-defense

Whereas the Policy and Procedure for Removing Participants (passed 7/11/04) states:

Participants may be removed for promoting violence, racial hatred, or bigotry. Participants who are deemed detrimental to the accomplishment of the Free State Project’s goals may also be removed.

Therefore, according to the Policy and Procedure for Removing Participants, the FSP Board removes Chris Cantwell as a participant and declares him unwelcome to attend FSP-organized events.

In peace and liberty,

Jody

for the FSP Board

I understand why the board kicked him out. Anybody who advocates for violence is a potential liability:

Deep down, Free Staters know this, and that’s why they’re Free Staters. They see this injustice, they want it to stop, and so they are coming together to make a stand against it. The only problem is, now that they have come together, they have absolutely no idea what to do, because their vision of a peaceful evolution to a voluntary society is being shattered on an almost daily basis by government violence. That violence is all too sure to escalate, as the government agents of New Hampshire and elsewhere acquire more advanced and sophisticated technology to oppress these peaceful activists, and the population in general.

So what to do? It’s a terribly unpopular thing to say, but the answer, at some point, is to kill government agents. The government agents know that, and that’s why they want a tank.

Honestly, that kind of advocacy screams agent provocateur. But my main point isn’t the fact that Mr. Cantwell was given the boot, it’s the fact that a board exists to give him the boot. I’ve always been worried about the scale of the Free State Project. Bringing together the people necessary to take over the political body of an entire state is no small task. Trying to bring so many people into a single organization seldom works as intended.

I’m not a fan of large groups. Large groups tend to start off strong and end up paralyzed. Most groups start off with the best of intentions but, at some point, the group becomes more concerned about keeping itself alive than perusing its original mission. Small groups suffer from this complex less and allow member mobility. For example, were the Free Start Project a federation of smaller groups individuals not wanting to association with Mr. Cantwell could easily split off from his group to either form their own or to join another. Leaving a small group is cheaper (in terms of personal connections, group resources, etc.) than leaving a large group.

I’ve often thought that the Free State Project should be a idea, not an organization. In my vision people could declare themselves Free Staters just as they can declare themselves libertarians, anarchists, or discordians. That way individuals would have more autonomy.

My primary concern is that the Free State Project is starting to transition into the self-preservation stage of large organization. Giving Mr. Cantwell the boot does seem like the beginning of an ideological purge. Ideological purges always start small and appear to be focused exclusively on radicals within the group. As time goes on the purges become less and less focused. Eventually all but those deemed ideologically pure by the controlling interests of the organization are sent on their way and the organization effectively ceases pursuit of its declared mission. I hope the Free State Project hasn’t reached this point because I like much of the work that comes out of its members but I believe my concern is valid.

The Vietnamese Government Doesn’t Understand How the Internet Works

I’m a fan of saying that statism is synonymous with halting progress. Statists always attempt to curtail advancements by forcing them into preconceived notions. A classic example of this mentality can be found in stories involving Japanese Samurai. Many works note that the Samurai believed firearms to be dishonorable weapons. Such a mentality made sense to an individual who spent decades learning the art of swordsmanship. All of the time spent mastering the sword became irrelevant when some peasant with little training could strike from many yards away. Instead of realizing that technology had advanced to a point where the importance of the sword was diminished, a master swordsman would be apt to argue that firearms aren’t honorable. Why change yourself when you can force everybody else to change to suit your desires?

Today we’re seeing this with the emergence of the Internet. Statists are trying to confine the Internet to their preconceived notions. They don’t believe anybody with a blog can be a journalist because journalists have traditionally been individuals who work for centralized state-recognized news organization. They don’t want to acknowledge that crypto-currencies are real currencies because it goes against their belief that money must be centrally issued paper notes. This is what leads governments around the world to implement stupid laws like this:

A controversial law banning Vietnamese online users from discussing current affairs has come into effect.

The decree, known as Decree 72, says blogs and social websites should not be used to share news articles, but only personal information.

The law also requires foreign internet companies to keep their local servers inside Vietnam.

A government could only issue such a decree if it lacked an understanding of how the Internet works. Enforcing laws requires that you can identify offenders. The beauty of the Internet is that one can maintain anonymity if they desire. How can the Vietnamese government enforce laws regulating blogs if those blogs are created on a computer that is connected to a random wireless network under a pseudonym and hosted on a location hidden service? Statists can pass whatever laws they want but reality isn’t going to reform itself to make enforcement of those laws possible.