Archive for March, 2014

Romans 13 and the King James Bible

March 28, 2014

Note that my King James Bible is a scathing rebuke at the “divine right” of kings, no matter how much one speculates on the intentions and motives of the man for the hour, and your modern filthy-lucre-motivated, government-monopoly-protected, government-forced copyright-royalty supported modern translations do no better at “clarifying” the spirit of Romans 13 than the King James. James did not propose the idea anyway, it came from a Puritan.

Take a hint from some of the unique stamps of authority. One, you get an idea of what Romans 13 means from Romans 17 and 18 where GOD himself puts it in the heart of the ten kings who share power with the Beast himself, to burn the Great Whore with fire.

In another point dear to the hearts of Christian libertarians especially ancaps, is this word “servant”, correctly translated in the King James Bible. But in every one of the copyright-tainted NCC-influenced versions it is instead translated as “slave”. These modern books purport to use modern language, but in modern English the word “slave” refers to chattel slavery, where the slave is fully owned and has no more rights than a pig.

A clear reading of the context in the laws of Moses shows that the word “servant” does not mean “slave” AT ALL, but usually more like contractual work or restitution. Funny, the only time the word “slave” appears in the KJB is a contemptuous reference as a spoiled “homeborn” slave, but any such “slaves” bought from “strangers” were to be treated as family.

And in the laws of Moses is a clear ban on forcing free men into any servanthood.

The other “smoking gun” sign of diabolical NCC theology infiltration is the prolific use of the word “race”, as in “holy race”, in the modern translations, instead of the more proper use of the word “seed”. It is less carnal, and

Is the Non-Aggression Principle enough?

March 28, 2014

I haven’t read Hoppe (one of these days I will) but “follow the NAP” is truly not enough to resolve what we all know is “right”.

The NAP is basically just a minimum starting point and minimum requirement for an “ethical guideline” for interaction with others. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” is a better rule in my opinion. But that requires some active charity in some situations.

No one has the right to force others to do his bidding. We all prefer to do everything voluntarily. Ask a left-fascist (aka “social justice liberal”) to give HIS OWN money.

Another NAP gap is children. Walter Block did a great job of applying the NAP “ruthlessly” to its logical conclusion to come up with “evictionism”, but that falls short of what we all know is the minimum required for a minimal ethical baseline.

By the act of having sex, you take the “risk” of having the blessing (as I call it) of the appearance of a new individual. But as that individual is conceived helpless outside the womb until “viability”, and helpless outside the womb too after birth, the mother AND father have an obligation to that new life with all its implications until he is able to fend for himself.

That obligation can be fulfilled of course by finding adoptive parents that will take care of that child and rear him reasonably well, but one of the basic tenets of libertarian (and anarchist) philosophy is that each one of us must take responsibility for our own actions. The principle of restitution can teach us here that if our act results in the conception of a helpless new person, we owe that new person to care for it.

That principle would not apply strictly to cases of rape, but applies to some 98% of pregnancies. However, even in cases of rape, where it is not the result of a mother’s own action, in the case of an infant, there is still a forcing of harm on that infant (both before and after birth) if the parents neglect the proper care.

However, I still oppose any extraordinary measures to seek out and punish parents for abortions. In this case, cultural shame would be the most effective strategy.

Even more effective is a strong Christian influence, as this has made slavery a dirty word around the world today, along with gladiator battles, extreme baby abuse, and so on.

// <![CDATA[
function DOMContentLoaded(browserID, tabId, isTop, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) { object.DOMContentLoaded(browserID, tabId, isTop, url);} };
function Nav(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, isBool, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.Nav(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, isBool, url); };
function NavigateComplete(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.NavigateComplete(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, url); }
function Submit(browserID, tabID, target, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.Submit(browserID, tabID, target, url); };

// ]]>

Two Historical Myths – Two Historical Revisions: Part 1 | Bible on Tap

March 26, 2014

Canadian Man Apprehended by Mental Health Authorities After Spending a Few Days Giving Away Money – Hit & Run :

March 26, 2014

Apparently statist authorities think that giving away money is insane if it’s your own money, but to support theft for third-party freebies is just fine if you’re a government gang.

Russia in prophecy

March 26, 2014

Russia, inasmuch as they never truly went to hibernation. They went into stealth mode. “Fooled you all!” (Well at least the usual government mouthpieces, i.e. NPR, NYT, LAT, Washington Post, CNN, and alphabet soup. –And don’t forget Fox talkers that still think Reagan killed Communism….

One GRU defector said a Russian translator said that Stalin and others were already discussing Glasnost strategy in the 1950s. In Gorbachev’s speech to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, he told them “If you think socialism is dead, you have another thing coming”. Kruschev banged his shoe at the UN podium and said, “We shall bury you! And God is with us!” That’s right, this Jesuit-educated Soviet strong man predicted it, explaining to somebody later that the shoe trick came from an old Russian custom of shaking the dirt off your boot when leaving a city that had treated you badly.

God and Magog eventually do form their alliance with a list of allies I read about in a Bible study missive in the 1970s, a list from Ezekiel: Iran, Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Arabia, Libya, Ethiopia (I think), and others. Apparently Germany was in the list.

Europe is fickle, folks. For example Russia could say we want euros not dollars. The Bible is two-thirds prophecy, half of that concern mostly what we call “end-times” including lead-ups to it, and a great deal of that is done deal already while even most Christians were looking the other way (and religious Jews have themselves all screwed up on the subject ever since they rejected Messiah). Daniel 9:24-27 pinpoints the year “Messiah shall be cut off”.

Speculation is rampant. Ukraine is a player and to Ukrainians, and to the Russians in the eastern part of the most recent borders, it’s a Very. Big. Deal.

Breathing threats at Russia is not productive. They KNOW they can do nothing. Even during the “Cold War”, my Air Force Sargeant brother-in-law stationed in Germany told me the obvious result in the case that Russia would decide to do an all-out conventional invasion of western Europe.

Time is on Russia’s side and all the power players in this theatrical dance know it. They are just play-acting for us, pretending we can make a difference in the vote. As long as the Fed has control of the currency and the economy, only the banks and their clients that play ball their way will be favored.

Except the blowback from alternative news sources they can’t control (yet?) has crimped their style. Americans’ roared back on Syria, surprise, and they also were surprised at political voices that did not follow script on Libya, like Sarah Palin even.

The truth is the truth no matter what. God is in control. Even of the Great Whore of Babylon, it’s God who puts in the heart of the ten kings to “burn her with fire”.

Freedom is better, peace is better.
Proverbs 26:17 He that passeth by, and meddleth with strife belonging not to him, is like one that taketh a dog by the ears.

The ever-lit light bulb and intellectual property

March 23, 2014

“Friend”, I didn’t mean for the SF bulb to be THE proof, and the other was a meme going around among us of the student rebellion days.

The point is, that if there is or if there were such a patent for a light bulb as one that never burnt out, would anybody *at all* be surprised if we found out that indeed, GE had bought it up and squelched it? A good example how that it is intuitively rational to see the “moral hazard” of a patent regime, however designed.

Your examples do not show an “unreasonable” application of the idea of copyright or patents. There are at least as many stories about the abuse of IP laws as there are about the abuse without them or outside them like your about Edgar Allan Poe’s.

I know of another where somebody rushed to copyright a song that had been in use for many years by fellow missionaries.

Such laws make IP theft and abuse much easier, in fact. Courtney Love wrote a scathing rebuke at the owners who dominated the music industry for their abuse of the system, leaving the real artists out in the cold. My son produces music in Miami Beach. He formed a band with his older brother and a friend and they had five offers he said made sure the big guys made all the money, for which reason the lawyer they got nixed the first four. The fifth one was okay (maybe word got around), but by that time one of them was tired of personality clashes.

There is another instance. The uncle of the founder of a well-known missionary association is the true writer of the movie Cimarron. The Hollywood studio rejected it, sent it back to him, then went ahead and put it on the big screen.

Without IP laws, these examples demonstrate how creators have a better chance of actually reliably enjoying the profit denied them today, especially if we have a true anarcho-capitalist society.

About this comment:

Our current legal structure around intellectual property is the result of political calculations by legislators who are often being influenced by lobbyists from the large media companies and other companies seeking to gain advantage over competitors. The result is confusing and even contradictory laws, but that does not negate the basic fairness of allowing a creator to benefit from his or her creation.

That is absolutely true and NO WAY you make that go away unless you abolish the custom of supporting a gang of any description, call it an IP Court, with the power to impose commercial and trade restrictions on anybody and everybody in the world or any other jurisdictional boundary.

A dictatorship to enforce “fair compensation” for anybody who creates any new anything is to invite oppression. Ayn-randian suicide by a band of “Mouchers”.

I believe in credit where credit is due and do like to see creative power awarded. That is why the mere idea of IP enforcement has made Microsoft one of the biggest parasite organizations in the world.

// <![CDATA[
function DOMContentLoaded(browserID, tabId, isTop, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) { object.DOMContentLoaded(browserID, tabId, isTop, url);} };
function Nav(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, isBool, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.Nav(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, isBool, url); };
function NavigateComplete(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.NavigateComplete(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, url); }
function Submit(browserID, tabID, target, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.Submit(browserID, tabID, target, url); };

// ]]>

A List of Ways Darwinism and Materialism Hold Back Science

March 23, 2014


The Malaysian Jetliner: A Non-Conspiracy Theory

March 23, 2014

Finally, a very convincing NON-CONSPIRACY reaction to the missing flight, and finally from the perspective of an actual pilot with apparently more flight time than any of the less experienced telegenic ones interviewed for news media.

The Malaysian Jetliner: A Non-Conspiracy Theory

See, most rationally-minded thinkers who do not swallow official explanations just because, and often find human-flawed people doing evil things with government power (oh what a surprise!) and attempting to cover it up (nah, not in America, right?), do not jump at things like this to say “conspiracy”.

In fact the usual media “conspiracy theory” debunkers, note, are the ones going into flaming paranoia mode, I have noticed.

But antennae go up when there is positive evidence of cover-up, (other than the usual cover-my-ass blather) for example when a police spokesperson declares there is no evidence of foul play, minutes after a very weird auto crash, before the temperature of the auto has even cooled off to ambient level.

Or a big event ushers in the biggest surveillance and police state regimen in the history of the USA.


Intellectual Property Monopolies Clarified

March 22, 2014

Tibor Machan always has something interesting to say in his columns at the Daily Bell web site. For example, his article “Intellectual Property, Anyone?”.

One comment pointed out that one reason that many intellectuals, even some libertarians, defend “intellectual property” monopolies, is “the envy that the intellectual suffer for the successful, troglodyte businessman”…

That may be true for many, but not for all.. But there is at least an idea that other parties who use someone’s new idea are somehow “freeloading”. I do believe in “credit where credit is due”, but this is impossible to do “justly” in the long run when you create incentives for “rent-seeking”. That’s what a copyright and patent regime does , especially in a land of corporations, or, the present land of corporations.

It inevitably becomes a battle of wits and trickery. Two people who have the same idea, but one of them lives closer to the patent office. Is that “fair”? I’m a software engineer, but some of my code is generic functions that I’ve written before. Whose code is that?

The US Constitution included the mention of copyright and patent, with a parenthetical clause that says the purpose was utilitarian. It a land of individual artisans, maybe, maybe not.

The most convincing argument, though, against “intellectual property”, in my opinion, is the total, absolute, unequivocal requirement by definition of an agency (government, mob, dictator, etc.) with powers to violate the non-aggression principle, PLUS the total, absolute, unequivocal arbitrary and capricious nature of where the boundaries are on “intellectual property”. That is, how far does it reach? How many years?

One science fiction writer, Robert Sawyer I think, wrote once that he thought copyrights should be limitless, without expiration, and inheritable to all generations!

This is all because we have come to think of copyright in this way. I have read that before the introduction of the printing press, there was no such thing as copyright, and copyright itself was “invented” by kings and authorities for the purposes of censorship. Think the “stamp act”. Think permits for the First Amendment akin to permits for the Second.

Although Thomas Cahill in his book “How the Irish Saved Civilization” pointed out that the reverence for books that the Irish learned from St. Patrick led to a noble’s exile for sneaking into his neighbor’s palace in the dark of night to copy the neighbor’s books in the dark!

The idea of monopoly rights for inventions for utilitarian purposes is also part and parcel with the idea that a monopoly of force over a bounded geographical area –or unbounded, as some world dictatorship advocates would have it– is necessary for scientific, artistic, and technological advancement.

One example demonstrates the lie of the collective utilitarian argument used in the USA Constitution. Tim Berners-Lee, and hypertext (and related ideas), and his colleagues, public-domaining the Web, and we all can see the results.

A more expansive article of evidence is the “open source” movement (as in the Open Source Foundation, which grew out of the idea of “free software”, with “free as in free speech, not free beer”, Richard Stallman’s preaching point. Tens and maybe hundreds of thousands of programmers are contributing to projects that by now ALL of us use.

Linux servers dominate the nodes used to carry the Internet. Firefox and Chrome and other freely shared browsers are pushing Internet Explorer out of the way. More and more of us are using Open Office or Libre Office or the Google applications to do their documents. This has inspired a parallel movement to do the same thing with hardware inventions, but not just computer hardware, but physical inventions. Open Source programs for 3-D printing for example.

And note that the barriers for entry into the class of patent-holders also holds back new inventions. With the new law Obama recently signed, it’s also a matter of who gets to the patent office first, and no matter if you had prior art, no matter if it was already in the public market. Get the patent and start trolling.

Another argument against patents as incentives for invention is the obvious fact of incentives to suppress them. A new energy patent holder (see, and use the hyphen!) might be tempted to sell it to an oil company for a billion bucks, and the oil company might consider it a bargain! And don’t forget the rumor of the light bulb that never burns out. Amazing how long those lights last in your car’s dashboard. And remember Tesla’s suppressed inventions. He might have been able to continue some of that today, with crowd-sourcing.

But the clincher, in my opinion, is the fact that no matter how you might enforce copyright or patent monopoly in the real world, there is no “natural” way at all, no “self-evident” way at all, to do it without arbitrary and capricious decree by somebody against any and all others.


Neocon objects: Rand Paul Nothing Like Reagan in Foreign Policy?

March 17, 2014

The idea of “peace through strength” was the core of what Reagan preached, and Rand Paul’s emphasis on this point shows more alignment with that principle than almost any other Republican potential presidential candidate, BY FAR.


Rand Paul’s other main point would be simply to point out that the other guys are no Reagan at all. Reagan said “Tear down this wall”, called the Soviet Union an “evil empire”. I don’t see Rand Paul extolling the glory of socialism, do you?


Grenada and Nicaragua were more an exception. But Reagan also learned something in Lebanon and pulled the Marines out soon after the bombing that killed a bunch of them, telling Ron Paul later that he just didn’t know they were so crazy over there.


Rand Paul’s policy is better than Reagan’s. History quiz: Who said “Commerce with all nations, alliances with none?”
Worked for 150 years until the bipartisan political party duopoly pushed us into World War I and the Federal Reserve sent us down the road to the fiat currency, another policy Reagan was too timid about.