Tuesday, February 1, 2011

BPMA--BiPartisanship My A**

The Economist is on sale at the Barnes and Noble on Ulster Avenue in Kingston, NY.  I picked up a copy of the venerable weekly, founded in 1843 by followers of John Cobden and Richard Bright of the Anti-Corn Law League.  From its inception The Economist has been in favor of globalization. Though associated with the Manchester liberals, advocates of laissez faire, the magazine supports Keynesian, big government policies that never work but result in subsidization of a readership mostly comprised of welfare mothers:  investment bankers and their lawyers.  As long as it avoids lobbing bouquets at the Federal Reserve Bank and Bush-Obama's Wall Street bailouts, the magazine is useful.

The Economist notes that the Obama State of the Union speech was tepid and unconvincing. It also mentions that in light of Jared Loughner's shooting of Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), wounding of 13 others and murder of six, the two parties have recently attempted to be bipartisan.

Bipartisanship is a mistake.  In light of the unfortunate violence in Arizona the Tea Party ought to press forward with more specific demands for freedom.  Extremist violence has attended many, if not all, political movements and there is less of it associated with the Tea Party than with the American left.

The American left has a long, persistent history of violence.  The lying in The New Republic and The New York Times about the mass murders in the Soviet Union in the 1930s; Noam Chomsky's ongoing Cambodian holocaust denial; Michael Moore's acclamation of Cuban murderer Fidel Castro (responsible for 100,000 killings); Hollywood's acclamation of serial killer Che Guevara.

Closer to home social democracy is  violent; regulation is violent; forced saving through Social Security is violent; taxation is violent; the suppression of dissent through the Patriot Act is violent.  Dissenters to the income tax are  violently incarcerated, and the Amish, who refused to pay Social Security taxes,  were for a time subjected to violent harassment from the US government. Anyone who doubts that the federal tax system is violent should write a letter to the IRS saying that you are not going to pay your taxes.  See what happens.

For many decades university professors defended the Soviet Union with psychopathic denial about its ongoing violence:  its mass murder of 65 million human beings over 70 years.  Paul Anthony Samuelson's economics textbook crowed about the Soviet Union's success just a few years before the 70-year-old socialist experiment completely collapsed for the reasons that Ludwig von Mises had published in the 1920s. The deprivation, despoliation of the environment, Gulags, forced starvation, torture, and imprisonment of millions were all matters of indifference to the Progressive movement of the 1930s and 1940s and later, which repeatedly lied about it.

The violence extends to institutions that the Progressive movement has imposed. That they were democratically imposed does not change their violent nature.  A plurality of Germans put Hitler in power and likely a majority supported him after he was in power.  Millions of Germans were willing to die on his behalf. So much for the legitimacy of democracy.  As de Tocqueville observed in 1835, the greatest threat to American freedom is tyranny of the majority.  Tyranny of the majority is the promise of Progressivism; the violence of The New Republic.

The violence in the Lockean American revolution was miniscule. People died in the American revolution, but  respect for human dignity is fundamental to American liberalism of which the Tea Party is the chief manifestation today.

In short: BPMA -- bipartisanship my a**.  Let us transform the violent and illegitimate federal government in Washington. Its supporters are thugs.

No comments: