Happy Independence Day!

Independence Day is one of the holidays I rather like.  Many that have no religious roots are simply celebrations of government or a government figure.  Memorial Day and Veterans’ Day have devolved into orgies of military worship.  Labor Day was basically a holiday to celebrate unions and now it’s just an excuse to not perform any labor for a day. Presidents’ Day is where we’re taught how great presidents are especially the ones that started wars or passed the most laws.

However, Independence Day is not, strictly speaking, a celebration of the US Government. The Washington regime we currently suffer under was not formed on July 4, 1776. That would be 1788 when the Constitution was ratified.  Rather, This holiday marks the day that thirteen separate states declared their independence from the British Empire.  It’s a celebration of decentralization, and that is almost always something worth celebrating.

Many of the Founding Fathers who signed the Declaration of Independence went onto serve in the eventual US government that was officially created twelve years later.  So in that sense it’s a founding document of that same government.  But most, if not all of these men would certainly be disgusted with the monstrosity that Washington, DC morphed into.

I find it interesting that the media and many politicians have taken to calling this day simply “The Fourth of July.”  I believe this is done with a purpose in mind.  They want this holiday to be thought of as the birth of the current United State, rather than the actual history which is several states seceding from a larger central government mainly to lower their tax burden.

I prefer to celebrate the tax rebellion.  Sometimes I think we need another one.

We need another Warren Harding

I love this quite from 1920

“America’s present need is not heroics, but healing; not nostrums, but normalcy; not revolution, but restoration; not agitation, but adjustment; not surgery, but serenity; not the dramatic, but the dispassionate; not experiment, but equipoise; not submergence in internationality, but sustainment in triumphant nationality”.

Can the peace candidate win?

I’ve made the case that Trump is staking out the position of peace candidate.  But can that strategy win?  After all, I compared him to Reagan who certainly wasn’t viewed as the peace candidate in 1980 when he won his first term.  I was an enthusiastic supporter of the non-interventionist Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012, and he didn’t stand a chance.

So can Peace win?  I figured why not look over the last few elections to see if being the bigger warmonger was a liability or an asset:

2012: Obama had been quite reckless in foreign affairs during his first term.  He escalated the Afghanistan quagmire and launched a foolish campaign against Libya based on lies. However, he was able to make the case that he ended the Iraq War (despite the fact that it never really ended and he had tried to extend it anyway).  When you factor in that Mitt Romney’s campaign was centered around the preemptive surrender of foreign policy to Benjamin Netanyahu, it’s clear Obama was the relative Peace Candidate. Conclusion: Peace Wins

2008: McCain is the most crazed warmonger to ever win a major party nomination in the postwar era, and that’s really saying something.  Obama managed to win the Democratic nomination by being the one candidate who could actually claim to have been against the Iraq War. Conclusion: Peace Wins

2004: Bush had just launched two expensive wars that showed no signs of ending.  Kerry was an idiot who would’t take a firm position on anything, but he was still the relative Peace Candidate. Conclusion: War Wins

2000: War and Peace weren’t really the defining issues in this campaign, but Bush lied and said he wanted to return to a “humble” foreign policy.  Gore represented a continuation of the Clinton regime that had been in a state of low-level perpetual war for most of the previous eight years.  So even though this was basically a tie, Conclusion: Peace Wins

1996: Americans weren’t focused on foreign policy in 1996.  Clinton was probably still seen as the peace candidate compared to Bob Dole.  Clinton’s interventionism and been under the radar in his first term compared to his second, and Dole was still seen as an old school Cold Warrior.  Hard to say it was the decisive factor, but the perception that Clinton was a 60’s era peacenik didn’t hurt him at all.  Conclusion: Peace Wins

1992: Bush had just wrapped up the Gulf War when the ’92 campaign got underway.  The war was very popular, but Americans were more concerned with NAFTA and other domestic issues.  The ex-hippy, draft dodger Clinton was able to beat the war hero Bush despite the (false) victory against Saddam Hussein.  Conclusion: Peace Wins

You could make the argument that the Bush/Reagan/Nixon victories in 72, 80, 84, 88 were all somewhat anti-peace, but that truly was a different era.  Basically from 1920 until the Cold War ended, the Republicans were seen as “realists” on the international stage while the Democrats were the ones prone to foreign adventurism.  So while McGovern was clearly the peace candidate in 1972, Nixon was reaping the benefit of having ended the Democrats’ unpopular Vietnam War.

As you can see it gets a little murky if you go back into the Cold War era, but Carter was definitely the peace candidate in 1976.  Nixon, believe it or not, was the peace candidate in 1968 after Hubert Humphrey stole the Democrat primary.  Johnson was incorrectly viewed as the peace candidate in 1964.  Kennedy was actually a bit of a warmonger in 1960. Eisenhower was the peace candidate in 1952 and was reelected on that reputation in 1956.

There’s normally a bi-partisan consensus on perpetual war, but if you look at what was the perception in presidential elections since 1952, I would say Peace has the edge.  The warmongers usually only win when foreign policy is relegated to the sidelines in favor of some new welfare entitlement or an economic crisis.  When given a clear choice between war and peace, peace usually wins.

I think  the Donald is onto something.  At least he’s making this election much more interesting than 2012.

All WWII vets were not saints

I follow someone on twitter who uses the handle Screwed by State.  He (or she) seems like quite a consistent libertarian on most issues and I’d urge people to follow him to get the latest on the battle over Net neutrality and other topics.  However, he tweeted something this morning that bothered me.  It was this picture:

An American sailor of the U.S. Navy rings in 1942 with a companion while on leave. New York City, New York, U.S.A. 31 December 1941. Image taken by Otto Bettmann.:

and the tweet was “A sailor on leave with his girl, New Years eve, New York, 1941.”  A quick google search reveals he copied this image from Pinterest and the caption there is “An American sailor of the U.S. Navy rings in 1942 with a companion while on leave. New York City, New York, U.S.A. 31 December 1941. Image taken by Otto Bettmann.”

So there is no evidence that the woman in this picture was the sailor’s “girl” unless  “girl” means the woman he was drinking with on New Year’s Eve in New York City.  Screwed by State apparently wants his followers to imagine this was some brave soldier having one last romantic evening with his future wife before he went off to war to defend his friends and family from the evil Nazis.  It’s at least as likely this is just some woman out having a good time who was attracted to a man in uniform.  I’d say there is probably about a 50% chance these two never saw each other again after New Year’s Day 1942.

Now I don’t care if young men and women want to have a few drinks and sleep together. More power to them as far as I’m concerned.  But why do Americans of seemingly every political outlook have to go around canonizing soldiers, particularly those from the “greatest generation”? Why do so many people assume that American soldiers in the 1940’s were the one military in all of human history who were well behaved and never did anything bad or immoral.  If you saw this same picture, but the man was in regular street clothes, would you really jump to the conclusion that this couple was in some committed relationship?

I have news for you.  Servicemen from World War II weren’t all brave.  They weren’t all good.  Most of them never fought anybody.  They certainly weren’t defending America as they rampaged through Asian jungles or the European countryside thousands of miles from home.

Here are some other images people might want to take a look at:

In this undated image released by the Yokosuka City Council in Japan, U.S. sailors gather in front of a Yasu-ura House “comfort station” in Yokosuka, south of Tokyo.

By the late summer of 1944, soon after the Invasion of Normandy, women in Normandy began to complain about rapes by American soldiers. Hundreds of cases were reported.

During the Second World War, the demand from servicemen grew so large that most of the better brothels on Hotel Street simply stopped seeing local men altogether.  To speed things along, a “bull pen” system was instituted:  Hawaiian matrons guarded the doors, turning away any man who was drunk or looked like a troublemaker.  Each then paid his fee and received a poker chip, then waited for an available room where he undressed and waited for the whore who was working in the next room; she would come in, collect her chip, inspect him for signs of venereal disease, quickly wash him and do her work.  He had three minutes to achieve release, after which she said “aloha” and was off to the next room while he washed up and got dressed.  Most brothels required girls to see at least 100 men a day and to work at least 20 days per month

So there are just a few examples of some unsavory behavior by our sainted WWII veterans.  The point isn’t that American soldiers are exceptionally bad.  They’re just not exceptionally good despite all the propaganda.  That includes the “Good War.”  Give a bunch of 18-26 year old men guns and tell them to invade and occupy some foreign country and it will be the same thing every time.  Some will rape women.  A small number will commit war crimes.  A lot will visit prostitutes.  Don’t pretend otherwise just because they wear an American Flag patch on their shoulder.

Armistice Day

97 years ago today, after a string of military defeats, the German Empire signed an armistice with the British and French Empires.  So Germany stopped fighting the Allies a few hours later, and this marked the end of what later came to be known as World War I.

The 11th hour, of the 11th day, of the 11th month.

We now know the day as Veterans Day in the United States as all Americans are urged to heap praise on anyone who has ever been employed by the US military and refer to them as heroes without knowing any details about their “service.”

Americans should really focus more on the origins of this day and be educated about the last hours of World War I.  Perhaps libertarians and anti-war types can make some inroads with the flag worshipers if they learn the truth about Armistice Day and the psychopaths who ruled western states a hundred years ago.

The armistice was signed at 5 am and went into effect at 11 am local French time.  So the combatants knew the war would end in a few hours, and yet they fought to the last minute. They were following the orders of their superiors right on up to the Prime Ministers and Presidents.  There were over 10,000 casualties on that last day and close to 3,000 deaths. What exactly is heroic about this?  Knowing the war is about to end, but sending troops to kill and die so that their strategic position was a tad better just in case hostilities resumed at some later date.  Was it heroic for the politicians to allow their generals to oversee these atrocities? Was it heroic for the Generals to order their troops to continue killing after four bloody years of war were finally about to come to an end?  Was it heroic for the troops who followed these insane orders to continue killing others and risking their own lives for literally no reason?  For a few feet of dirt in France?

The Germans, while not having formally surrendered, were undergoing revolution at home and their Emperor had abdicated.  They were going to be unable to continue the war and negotiated the Armistice from a position of weakness.  They had requested that the Armistice go into effect immediately, but the Supreme Allied Psychopath, Ferdinand Foch, refused.  He wanted to kill a few more of them.

The last man killed in World War I was 23 year old American Henry Gunther.  He was a German-American who hadn’t wanted to enter the war to kill Germans.  He was drafted and became a slave of the US government which sent him to war to kill Germans.  He wrote a letter home to a friend saying the war was terrible and warning him to avoid being drafted.  This resulted in a demotion in rank which he foolishly tried to reverse by charging the German lines in the minutes just before 11 am.  He was killed at 10:59.   I wonder if his family celebrated this “holiday” in the years following the Great War.

Harry Truman was still ordering troops under his command to murder as many Germans as possible right up until the eleventh hour on November 11, 1918.  This was a sign of things to come, as he murdered hundreds of thousands of Japanese in 1945 rather than allowing them to surrender.

A Congressional Act approved May 13, 1938, made the 11th of November in each year a legal holiday: “a day to be dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be thereafter celebrated and known as ‘Armistice Day’.”  This is the same Congress that just three years later, gave the criminal Franklin Delano Roosevelt the Declaration of War he had been so desperately seeking, plunging the United States into the even more bloody World War II and sending another generation of young men to die and murder on behalf of the government.  Many of these young men were enslaved or as the State likes to call it, “drafted.”  I guess the “cause of world peace” didn’t have staying power in the US Congress.

After World War II, Armistice Day became Veterans Day.  Happy Fucking Veterans Day.

Happy Indigenous Peoples Day

According to the United States Government, today is Columbus Day.  Christopher Columbus was allegedly the first European to set foot in the New World.  Evidence suggests he was quite cruel to the indigenous inhabitants of the lands he helped conquer.

To the “Native Americans” in the United States, Columbus is a symbol of their eventual defeat by the evil white Europeans.  So the solution to this feeling of shame is to get the government that was founded by those evil white Europeans who regularly committed atrocities against them and violated treaties made with them, to recognize a holiday in their honor which will be known as Indigenous Peoples Day.

I wonder if Europeans in Europe can have an Indigenous Peoples Day to commemorate what their cultures were like before Angela Merkel launched her Muslim invasion of 2015. No that would be racist.

The Confederate Battle Flag is not the Stars and Bars

I was incorrect when I referred to the Confederate Battle Flag as the Stars and Bars.  This is the actual flag of the Confederate Government which was known as the Stars and Bars

Flag of the Confederate States of America (1861-1863).svg

I discovered this reading a piece by Boyd Cathey where he discusses the controversy surrounding the Battle Flag and delves into Civil War revisionism in general.  I’d urge people to read it to get a better understanding of why the Civil War took place.

Suddenly I want to fly the Stars and Bars

Rothbard Has The Last Word On The Confederate “False Flag” Issue

I have no love for the Confederacy.  It was just another short lived government in the history of mankind that liked to talk a lot about freedom and liberty, but was designed to subvert both.  However the old battle flag to me, rather than representing some sort of racial oppression, should be a symbol of how the United States Government raped, murdered, and burned through the South solely for its own glory and that of its leaders, Grant, Lincoln, and Sherman.  That brainwashed schoolchildren are taught this was all done to end slavery is one of the many crimes of the government schools.

So all this nonsense from the totalitarian Left about how we need to “end hate” by removing this flag from the public sphere just makes me want to hoist it up on a flag pole in my front yard for the first time in my life.  Murray Rothbard put it best when discussing the false history inflicted upon us in modern day Amerikkka:

The Union was taken, by its Northern worshipers, from a contractual institution that can either be cleaved to or scrapped, and turned into a divinized entity, which must be worshipped, and which must be permanent, unquestioned, all-powerful. There is no heresy greater, nor political theory more pernicious, than sacralizing the secular.

Of Lincoln, Grant, and Sherman he had this to say:

Perhaps, someday, their statues, like Lenin’s in Russia, will be toppled and melted down; their insignias and battle flags will be desecrated, their war songs tossed into the fire. And then Davis and Lee and Jackson and Forrest, and all the heroes of the South, “Dixie” and the Stars and Bars, will once again be truly honored and remembered.

I urge you to read the full article.  It’s short and it needs to be read by anyone who values the truth about our history.  I also recommend Tom DiLorenzo‘s article over at Lewrockwell.com.

The anti-Confederate flag hysteria is only one small part of the Left’s general strategy, however.  It is part of their overriding strategy of diverting the public’s attention away from all the grotesque failures of leftist interventionism, from the welfare state to the government takeover of education to the war on drugs and beyond.  The neocons who run the Republican Party are usually complicit in all of this.

And Judge Napolitano dismisses the whole idea that government can somehow outlaw hate.  However, he argues State governments should remove the Confederate Flag from their state houses:

If I were in the South Carolina legislature, I’d vote to remove the Confederate flag from the Statehouse because I’d silence all government speech except that which is universally accepted

Happy Independence Day

Independence Day, usually now referred to by just its date, the 4th of July, has devolved into another State holiday where Americans shoot off fireworks and celebrate “the troops.”  Rather than celebrating freedom, we’re being instructed to celebrate empire and war.

In a way it’s fitting that a holiday meant to commemorate the ideals of the enlightenment, where educated wealthy men who formed a natural aristocracy threw off the chains of an oppressive foreign government and founded one based on individual rights, has come to this.

Why do I say this?  Well the very men who promoted and carried out the American Revolution proved quite tyrannical in their own right when they themselves came to power.

A few examples:

George Washington, the father of our country, also put down the whiskey rebellion (a tax protest) by force.

John Adams threw aside free speech concerns with the Alien and Sedition Acts.

Thomas Jefferson used “public money” to purchase a giant piece of land through the Louisiana Purchase without consulting Congress.

James Madison launched a war of conquest against Canada.

Happy 4th!