Category Archives: Governments

The Brain Standard, Part Two, by Robert Gore

Three steps forward, two steps back; so humanity advances.

Part One

Ideas are the foundation of the brain standard, one of which is that only individuals have rights. This cuts through the collectivist dreck that passes for thought among most of the world’s so-called intellectuals. The variations of collectivism all disguise nothing more than brute force hiding behind propaganda. Their inevitable failures stem from their essential flaw: those that control the collective claim rights that negate those of the individual.

There are grounds for hope. From the ruins of impending collapse there will be some who reject collectivism and are committed to rebuilding on a foundation of individual rights. How they will protect those rights and whatever territories they stake out are what theoretical physicists sometimes call “engineering problems.” One advantage they’ll have, though, as the brain standard constituency—they’ll be smarter than their adversaries. Attention, imagination, and intelligence will be keenly focused on building from the ruins and protecting what they’ve built.

Here’s a thought experiment. Imagine someone invents a cheap, portable device that defends its bearer and his or her property from all violence from all sources, but has no offensive capability. The device is so cheap that virtually everyone can buy it, and charities are set up to donate it to those who can’t. The device is universally available and creates a world without violence.

How would such a world function? People would have to produce to survive, but absent mutual agreement no one would have an enforceable claim on anyone else’s production. There would be no coercive transfers of money or property. Disputes would be settled by negotiation and mediation. A body of civil law similar to English common law would develop. Surely such a society would figure out a way to deal with nonviolent crime.

The negation of violence would eliminate government’s nominal rationale: protecting citizens from violence. In the absence of government (and its violence), individuals and society as a whole would be free to advance as far as their capabilities will take them.

This extreme hypothetical offers a stark contrast with the absence of anything resembling freedom anywhere in the world today. Government and collectivism are top-down codependents based on violence and coercion. Their current manifestations are replaying the dreary and what should be the common knowledge lesson of history: they inevitably fail, often after a great deal of bloodshed.

******

SLL has a unique take on the world. Some like its perspective, some don’t. If you like it, or if you don’t but take a perverse joy in funding your intellectual adversaries, please consider offering compensation for the time and effort put into SLL. Most of our readers are value-for-value people. If that describes you, please recognize SLL’s value. The payment links are on the right or click the button below. Thank you.

******

In the current jockeying among collectivist governments for the things over which they jockey, Russia’s and China’s are doing a better job than the U.S.’s. The former are the co-leaders of the Eurasian alliance and represent substantial politic and economic power. The latter is bankrupt, embroiled in yet another war it won’t win, and stands accused of sabotaging its most important European ally’s oil pipelines. At home, the U.S. government and its fellow travelers are in thrall to brain-dead ideologies that hasten the country’s disintegration.

Continue reading

The War for the Dollar is Over Part II: The Fly or the Windshield? By Tom Lungo

Tom Luongo is not trying to be cute and his points and arguments are clear, which is not always the case. He takes a complicated set of issues and makes them understandable. This is one of his best. From Tom Luongo at tomluongo.me:

Live images flashing by
Like windshields towards a fly
Frozen in that fatal climb
But the wheels of time, just pass you by
-RUSH, “Between the Wheels”

In part I of this series I told you the war over the US dollar was over because the bane of domestic monetary policy, Eurodollar futures, lost the battle with SOFR, the new standard for pricing dollars.

The ignominious end of the Eurodollar system is a study in the evolution of markets, as a new system replaces an old one. Old systems don’t die overnight. We don’t flip a switch and wake up in a new reality, unless we are protagonists in a Philip K. Dick novel.

More than a decade ago I looked at the responses to President Obama cutting Iran out of the SWIFT system as the beginning of the end of the petrodollar system. The goal was to take Iran out of the global oil markets by shutting Iran out from the dominant dollar payment system.

Out of necessity Iran opened up trade with its major export partners, most notably India, in something other than dollars. India and Iran started up a ‘goods for oil’ trade, or as Bloomberg called it at the time, “Junk for Oil.”

The stick of sanctions created a new market for pricing Iranian oil and a way around the monopoly of US dollar oil trading. India, struggling with massive current account deficits because of their high energy import bill, welcomed the trade as a way to lessen the pressure on the rupee.

Iran needed goods. They worked out some barter trade and the first shallow cuts into the petrodollar system were made.

Continue reading

Theorists vs. Practitioners, by Jeffrey A. Tucker

There are those that do and those that think. It’s not generally the former who screw up a society. From Jeffrey A. Tucker at brownstone.org:

Theorists vs. Practitioners

Just this weekend, I spoke at one of my favorite venues, the Liberty Forum in New Hampshire, which is an annual conference center on the Free State Project. It’s designed to encourage people to pick up and move to the freest state in the country for community and to help protect the state from the fate that befell Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. 

My first time speaking there was 2012, I believe, and I came away with an interesting revelation, which I can summarize as “Liberty is a hands-on task.” In my career until that time, the problem of economic and political matters were mostly matters of theory and I had spent most of my time reading and distributing high theory, a task I loved and still do. 

But coming to this event in New Hampshire I found something else entirely; a group of people who were busy doing things in practice to live freer lives. They were small business people, real-estate agents, people with alternative currency systems, people raising and selling food on and from their own farms, organizers of houses of worship and community centers, homeschoolers and school entrepreneurs, and much more besides, including office holders focusing on laws and legislation. 

It was here, for example, that I acquired my first Bitcoin, which in the early days showed great promise finally to recreate money in a way that government could not ruin. It struck me at the time as among the greatest inventions of the human mind. Tellingly, it did not come from academia (so far as we know) but from tinkerers who wanted to solve the problem of double spending on digital monetary units. It was genius. The economics journals ignored it for many years, of course. 

Continue reading

What Have We Learned? By Visayas Outpost

In an increasingly complex world, adopt the contrarian strategy. Simplify! From Visayas Outpost at theburningplatform.com:

“There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil

to one who is striking at the root.”

-Henry David Thoreau

That is an aerial view of the chemical fire in Palestine, Ohio, looking for all the world like a bruise on the Earth.  As the story is still unfolding, and seems to be competing with “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena” as the distraction du-jour, let me doff my hat to the man who surely ignited all this media firestorm:  Mr. Seymour Hersh.  By now you have undoubtedly read his work on the Nordstream pipeline sabotage, a story which itself still has more pages to be turned.

Nordstream should not come as a shock to anyone paying attention.  Between Cognitive Warfare and the downright evil machinations of the Borg, we need distraction events to round out the narrative intake.  It keeps us from noticing the real stories, like the US attacking its own NATO allies, or Pfizer producing vaccines they knew had a 44% miscarriage rate in women.  You know, the actual stories that you mustn’t focus on lest civilization itself be undermined.  So balloons, funny clouds, earthquakes, anything will do.  Literally just 20 minutes ago Mrs. Outpost sent me a link about a fireball streaking through the Texas sky.  Yes, Facebook will be all abuzz, so congratulations to the ever-vigilant netizens who like to poke this giant beehive.  Take a lunch break, take a deep breath.  Enjoy a smoke.

Continue reading

Georgia Is Targeted For Regime Change, by Andrew Korybko

Regime change is such a popular tactic in Washington because it seldom works. In the capital, nothing succeeds like failure. From Andrew Korybko at theautomaticearth.com:

The former Soviet Republic of Georgia experienced a serious Color Revolution attempt Tuesday night after radical pro-Western rioters tried to storm parliament in response to its passing of a bill requiring all organizations with at least 20% foreign funding to register with the authorities. The US-led Western Mainstream Media (MSM) artificially manufactured the false narrative in the run-up to events alleging that the law is based on Russia’s related system even though it’s explicitly inspired by the US’.

This well-intended attempt to protect Georgia’s fledging and admittedly imperfect democracy from foreign meddling per its sovereign right was subsequently exploited as the pretext for organizing a violent regime change against Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili. The West wants to punish him for his pragmatic refusal to open up a “second front” in the US’ proxy war on Russia after he publicly exposed this plot in early December while also pledging never to arm Kiev either.

President Salome Zurabishvili, who was visiting the UN in New York during the unsuccessful regime change against Garibashvili on Tuesday night, threw her full support behind the riots in a video that peddled the West’s false information warfare narrative alleging that the bill is backed by Russia. Readers should be aware that she served most of her career as a French diplomat after having been born there and was previously that country’s Ambassador to Georgia up until 2004.

Continue reading

Ukraine’s Endgame, by James W. Carden

Best case for Ukraine it ends up another U.S. dependency, a relationship from which the U.S. will gain nothing. From James W. Carden at theamericanconservative.com:

The Biden administration is setting the Ukrainians up for a state of permanent dependency.

The one-year anniversary of the Russian invasion today, and President Joe Biden’s surprise five hour trip to Kiev on Monday, should be occasion to raise some uncomfortable, indeed, unpopular questions, as to what exactly Ukraine—a beneficiary of, among many other things, over $100 billion in U.S. aid—has been seeking to achieve in the nine years since the Maidan revolution.

From the time Ukraine declared independence on August 24, 1991, until the Maidan coup of February 2014, Ukraine was essentially a binational kleptocracy that used its position as a buffer state, particularly in its role as a transit hub for Russian natural gas to Europe, to the advantage of its kleptocratic elite—a coterie of deeply compromised politicians and former Soviet-era functionaries-turned-oligarchs.

Advertisement

The tension between the Russian East and Galician West came to a head during the Maidan protests when then-president Viktor Yanukovych, a politician from eastern Ukraine, sought to leverage Ukraine’s unique geographic position during the country’s E.U. accession bid—a bid against which Russia, with long and deep economic ties to Ukraine, furiously objected.

Yanukovych squeezed both sides, and in the end, the economic deal offered by the E.U. paled in comparison to the one offered by Russia’s Vladimir Putin. And so, Yanukovych, avaricious, yes, but also wary of upsetting his restive neighbor to the East, went with the deal, worth some $15 billion, offered by the Russians.

Continue reading

Nord Stream Attack – ‘Officials’ Throw More Chaff To Hide The Real Perpetrators, by Moon of Alabama

The U.S. government hasn’t told the truth about the Ukraine-Russia war since before it began. Why would they start now? From Moon of Alabama at moonofalabama.org:

Right at the same moment the New York Times publishes a shoddy ‘officials say’ story about alleged intelligence about the Nord Stream terror attack the Germany weekly Die Zeit, which has strong U.S. secret services ties, comes up with an equally unbelievable tale of a ‘Ukrainian owned’ sailing boat playing the major role in the attack:

Nord-Stream-Ermittlungen: Spuren führen in die Ukraine
Ermittler haben das Boot identifiziert, von dem aus die Anschläge auf Nord Stream ausgeführt wurden. Offenbar wurde es von einer Firma gemietet, die Ukrainern gehört.

My translations:

Nord Stream investigation: Traces lead to Ukraine
Investigators have identified the boat from which the attacks on Nord Stream were carried out. Apparently, it was rented by a company owned by Ukrainians.

No, it is not the USS Kearsarge, the U.S. amphibious assault ship which ‘trained’ ‘mine removals’ near Bornholm island next to the pipelines just days before they blew up,  which the ‘investigators’ identified.

AZ @AZmilitary1 – 13:52 UTC · Sep 27, 2022

An expeditionary detachment of US Navy ships led by the universal amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge days ago was in the Baltic Sea
It was 30 km from the site of the alleged sabotage on the Nord Stream-1 gas pipeline and 50 km from the threads of Nord Stream-2 gas pipeline


bigger

The new claim is that some rather small yacht, which would not even be able to carry the necessary equipment to perform such a deed, was the main instrument in this:

Following joint research by [German main public TV news unit] (ARD’s capital city studio), the ARD political magazine Kontraste, [German public TV] SWR and DIE ZEIT, it was possible to reconstruct to a large extent in the course of the investigation how and when the explosive attack was prepared. According to this, traces lead in the direction of Ukraine. However, investigators have so far found no evidence of who ordered the destruction.

Continue reading

Explaining the Unexplainable, by Karen Kwiatkowski

Who are you going to believe, the U.S. government or one of the most revered journalists in America, a man with a decades-long record of breaking big stories the U.S. government didn’t want broken? If you’re having trouble with that question you’re on the wrong website. From Karen Kwiatkowski at lewrockwell.com:

The US Government and its political apologists have repeatedly called the Seymour Hersh expose of what really happened, the who, how, and why of Nordstream 1 and 2 fantasy, fiction and completely false.  All of a sudden, “US government investigators” have identified a vessel from which the Nord Stream sabotage was committed and …wait for it…. traces to a company owned by Ukrainians, according to new reports in Die Zeit and the New York Times, and well, everywhere!

Who’d a’ thunk it?

The pipeline sabotage was an act of war by the United States, as explained and documented a few weeks ago by Seymour Hersh with his extensive range of deep state sources. A major question remains: Was this an unlawful US Executive Act of War against Russia, against Germany, or horrifyingly, both? It is unlikely that German intelligence has not known the basic facts of the pipeline attacks for many months, but until Hersh’s reporting the German Chancellor and his party could simply remain silent, and they did.

Continue reading

As Bakhmut Falls, US May Turn From Ukraine, Starting With Pipeline Story, by Joe Lauria

If the U.S. can blame Ukraine for the Nordstream pipelines sabotage, it may be able to start backing away from Ukraine. From Joe Lauria at consortiumnews.com:

If the Donbass city of Bakhmut falls to the Russians the U.S. may need to save face in order to reverse course in Ukraine, writes Joe Lauria.

On its face, The New York Times article yesterday, “Intelligence Suggests Pro-Ukrainian Group Sabotaged Pipelines, U.S. Officials Say,” appears intended to exonerate both the U.S. and Ukrainian governments from any involvement in the destruction last September of the Nord Stream gas pipelines between Russia and Germany.  

The thrust of the Times article is that Ukrainians unaffiliated with the Kiev government were the ones who did it, according to the newspapers often cited, unnamed “U.S. officials.” 

But a closer examination of the piece reveals layers of nuance that do not dismiss that the Ukrainian government may have had something to do with the sabotage after all. 

The story quotes anonymous European officials who say a state had to be involved in the sophisticated underwater operation.  The Times goes out of it way to say more than once that that state was not the United States.  And while the second paragraph of the story says categorically that the state is not Ukraine either, the article then leaves the door open to possible Ukrainian government involvement:

“U.S. officials declined to disclose the nature of the intelligence, how it was obtained or any details of the strength of the evidence it contains. They have said that there are no firm conclusions about it, leaving open the possibility that the operation might have been conducted off the books by a proxy force with connections to the Ukrainian government or its security services. [Emphasis mine.]

Continue reading

Mike Whitney Interviews Paul Craig Roberts About the Rising Tensions with China

Trying to pick a fight with China is insanity. From Paul Craig Roberts and Mike Whitney at unz.com:

Mike Whitney— The Biden administration is determined to provoke China on the issue of Taiwan. The White House now believes that they must take a more aggressive approach to China in order to contain their development and preserve America’s role as regional hegemon. The irony of Washington’s approach, however, is the fact that tens of thousands of US corporations have fled the US over the last 3 decades to take advantage of China’s low-paid work force. In fact—according to Registration China—there are now more than 1 million foreign-owned companies registered on Mainland China, many of which are owned by Americans. These corporations are largely responsible for China’s meteoric economic rise over the same period of time. So my question to you is this: Why is China being blamed and targeted for the explosive growth for which US corporations are mainly responsible? Or do you disagree with my analysis?

Paul Craig Roberts— Your question is really several. Your question itself identifies the main or over-riding reason for Washington’s back-tracking on the one-China policy that has been in effect since 1972—China’s threat to US hegemony. The neoconservatives who dominate US foreign policy, the principal purpose of which, in their words, is to prevent the rise of other countries with sufficient power to constrain US unilateralism, now face both China and Russia as threats to US hegemony. Russia’s punishment is conflict in Ukraine, sanctions, missiles on their border, and blown up Nord Stream pipelines. The goal is to isolate Russia from Europe and to present the Kremlin with sufficient problems to keep Moscow out of Washington’s way.

Just as the US broke its agreement with Russia not to expand NATO and has withdrawn from the agreements made during the Cold War that served to reduce tensions, Washington is now moving toward repudiating the one-China policy as it no longer serves Washington’s interest.

Continue reading