The New Terrapin Gazette

Number 279
24 November, 2012

Whatever talent it is that helps a baby to learn a language with three or four times (or any number of times!) the ease of an adult, this talent is apparently not a “speech instinct”. We have no birthright to vocabularies and syntaxes.

Terminology As Deceit

An enthusiastic advocate of LSD asks, “Why did our drug research frighten the establishment so profoundly? Why does it still frighten them?” The answer is that the political establishment always demands a certain level of control over the populace, and the more Utopian the establishment, the broader and the deeper are its demands. Citizens perceived as ignoring the interests of the government are necessarily damned as rebellious, though they may be in no sense violent or conspiratorial. It is their distinctiveness, their rejection of convention, that frightens authoritarians.

Thus has it always been. In many cases, the deviant individual may be left to himself, unmolested, because the government has no overriding need for the community to work cooperatively on a vital task (such as fighting an all-out war). In peacetime, if the political authority encourages the people to “cooperate” and “progress” toward a perfected society, that is a sure indication the ruling class believes it must be able to forbid and require a great many behaviors.

Whenever the body politic is required to move “forward” (the word is, among other things, an old Nazi slogan, recently reincarnated) it is not being urged to move; it is under orders to allow itself to be controlled.

That’s what primarily concerns Team Obama: control. Remember, The One is first and foremost a community organizer; then ask yourself what the purpose of organization is.

The grand Obamoid plan for the USA is vaguely referred to as something called Hope and Change, which is advertising jargon that promotes solidarity.

Those who practice/advocate experimentation with psychoactive chemicals often assume the corporate and governmental sectors hate them, while believing “progressive” thinkers and groups will accept them. The advocates of chemically-produced enlightenment could not be more wrong. In fact “progressivism” cannot tolerate an individualistic, adventuring ethos — it demands obedience, conformity, and most of all, a commitment to the welfare not of the individual, but of the collective. The most profound, intolerant and comprehensive fascism is the suffocating authoritarianism of the “Left“.

Those who believe the achievement of a Utopia is impossible have little if any reason to demand control over others; this relaxed attitude toward politics goes hand in hand with tolerance. True libertarians may disapprove of narcotic and psychoactive drug use, but they are unwilling to persecute addicts and latter-day hippies.

Fundamental errors are introduced and then compounded when “conservative” is defined as intolerant and “liberal” as more accepting, open to new ideas, and willing to allow unpopular behaviors.

The One, who experimented with drugs in his younger days, now knows that the essence of “liberalism” or “progressivism” lies not in “turning on, tuning in, dropping out”, but in amassing power and exercising control.

The result is bizarre. Today, a stiff-necked, dogmatic demagogue like Elizabeth Warren, braced by her academic credentials and doctrinaire, conformist collectivism, claims she is the inspiration of the Occupy Wall Street vandals. Those unkempt storm troopers of the “progressive” movement may remind some folks of real hippies, or they may seem to have inherited a portion of the mindset of the hedonistic bohemians of the first half of the twentieth century, but they are tools of a rigid, doctrinaire establishment that is highly disciplined. They are the unwitting, naive inheritors of the ethos of the Nazi Sturmabteilung.

The old stereotypes of “beatniks” and “conservatives” have few parallels today. Rebellion, the response to stagnant conformity, that was once sheer refusal to march to the drumbeat of tradition, is today a stringently conformist effort to overthrow capitalism and impose undifferentiated Utopia.

The shibboleth of a “progressive” today is his demand for control. Think of it that way, and you sweep away confusion. For example: Francisco Franco was not a man of the people, any more than Stalin was; the two were anything but distinct extremes at either end of the political spectrum. The differences between them were far more superficial than significant, yet the common misunderstanding is that the fascist and the communist were polar opposites.

When you see a photo of Woody Guthrie with that slogan about his hatred of fascists painted on his guitar, don’t think the man was a champion of Liberty; he knew the importance of solidarity — control — just as well as did Pete Seeger, Juan Peron, Salvador Allende, Pol Pot, Fidel Castro, Theodor Adorno, Alger Hiss, Leon Trotsky and Antonio Salazar. Call them “left”, call them “right”…the terms are either misleading or useless.

Whenever some meticulously-groomed politician tells you that you deserve a caring government that will see to the welfare and comfort of you and your neighbors, know that you are coping with a rascal who has designs on your Liberty. A decent government exists not to make life delightful or even secure, but to give you every honest chance to make of your life what you can — while discouraging all trespass on the rights of everyone. That government will step aside and allow you to find your own way, even if you believe LSD or heroin are aids to self-realization.

Those who offer you a perfect society are liars and would-be tyrants.

Links

Netanyahu has made a mistake.

A fellow named Anthony De Rosa is something called the “Social Media Editor” for Al Reuters, one of the news organizations that has yet to live down its past. Now what, exactly, “social media” might be remains, for this newsletter at least, a point that demands rational definition (can there be “non-social media” or “private media”?), but let that go. What matters is what this De Rosa person wrote for all to read on some sort of internet-like network, namely: “If Iron Dome is so successful, what’s the purpose of killing so many in retaliation, especially ‘human shield’ casualties?” (Source.) The reader probably knows that Iron Dome is an anti-missile defense system that works most of the time, but is not capable of stopping all the rockets flying out of Gaza into Israel. The reader may also believe that human shields are the ethical responsibility of those who employ them, which is correct. In any event, one Robbie Guy (who is unknown to this newsletter) replied to De Rosa as follows: “If you had an AMAZING jock strap, reducing pain by 90%, can I still keep kicking you in the balls without your retaliating?” That response “went viral”, as the kids say. De Rosa removed his comment from public view, but it was too late. His bigoted babble remains a matter of very public record. Good. It’s things like this that disgraced and discredited Al Reuters the first time around, and obviously the bastards have not reformed.

Governments are very good at spending money to no discernable benefit (the only benefit goes to the businesses who sell unnecessary goods and services to the government). Decent governments should be prudent. The US federal government is prodigal. Example.

Iran seems to be getting ready to bombard Israel, an event that will be triggered by Israeli attacks on the nuclear facilities in Iran.

Science explains it all. Well, if you can understand this stuff, will you kindly explain it to The New Terrapin Gazette’s baffled staff? Thank you in advance.

They aren’t “hackers”, they are “crackers”, and they have been unable to crack into Israel’s presence on the internet. That’s proof that not all software need be vulnerable. So how can you protect yourself? The first step involves never exposing Microsoft products to the internet. (It can be done safely, but it’s a task for experts.)

Governments reach for more tax revenues. Of course they do.

This is infuriating, but you won’t be likely ever to hear of it again — not on TV, not in your newspapers, not even on the internet. Why? Because it is a sterling example of media bias. Actually it’s complicity in censorship, which mocks the first amendment of the constitution.

Looking to pick up some good DVDs? Here are some tips. By the way, Spartan, which is one of this newsletter’s editor’s favorite films, is on this list, so there probably are some other good ones on it, as well.

Here are some intelligent ruminations on the Israel-Gaza war (yes, it is a war). Recommended.

Thanks go to subscriber JY for this eye-opener. Don’t skip it!

Something barely comprehesnsible is always happening (except for those periods in which it is not), so when tragedy strikes, the mysterious and misunderstood is easy to identify as the cause; what better causes than atmospheric nuclear testing or carbon-burning power generation? The cause of choice reflects the current popular fears, frustrations and fantasies, so it’s fashionable — but not at all scientific — to blame Katrina and Sandy on anthropogenic global warming. And the loons are still at it, in spite of the evidence. — Oh: while you are pondering that, note that Number 34 of this newsletter said, “…the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that has been produced by human activity amounts to two one-thousandths of one percent of the gases surrounding us”. That estimate is certainly wrong; it’s probably a bit high, but given the accepted fact that a little over one and one-half percent of the atmosphere is not nitrogen and oxygen, and given the reasonably accurate estimate that some five percent of all atmospheric carbon dioxide is of human origin, that means that there is hardly a lot of carbon dioxide (which is actually plant food) floating around. In fact there is not nearly enough to poison the oceans and cause climate catastrophe. Finally, remember that temperatures go up and down, whether human technology produces lots of carbon dioxide or not; that final fact was carefully ironed out of Mann’s hockeystick graph, as will be proved yet again if Mann’s crackbrained attempt to sue National Review and Mark Steyn ever results in a trial.

The French Revolution touched off a frenzy of conspiracist interpretation of events because it was virtually incomprehensible. By the same token, US foreign relations today provoke some simple, horrible and almost credible explanations for why bad things are happening. (Consider this one.) For some folks, simple incompetence and the lies of shameless rascals no longer suffice. Whatever interpretation you prefer, you should steel yourself, for more disasters await. It will be a rugged four years.

Try to ignore the graphics…and read what a weblogger thinks about the future of China. It will probably surprise you. Now if somehow one could only be sure that the Keystone Kops in Foggy Bottom were looking at these issues….

Does any rational person honestly expect the UN to be able to quell the conflict between the “Palestinians” and Israel? Of course not, and here is evidence backing up that answer.

“Warmers” should study this report as an example of the difficultly of attributing causes rationally. They will not, of course.

Out of Oz: optimism regarding a negotiated agreement ending the Iranian quest for nuclear weapons.

This clever cartoon packs a lot of information into ten minutes, and may just provoke you to learn more about the English language. Recommended.

The Commentaries Not Published In A Timely Fashion

What follows is unprecedented: this newsletter reveals texts that were written before the election but not published for reasons that involved computer malfunctions. Had the machinery worked as it was supposed to, these remarks would have been circulated prior to the vote.

What you are about to read was not written or edited after the election took place.

Of course many folks will find this information irrelevant or worse; that is why it is published at the end of this issue and after a notice informing you that if you stop reading now, you will miss nothing current.

What’s Next?

“Wingnuts” are entering an exciting, even exhilarating, phase of the 2012 campaign: their candidates are about to give every indication of doing well against Team Obama. The excitement is building and the cause is benefiting from all manner of effective “talking points”. A mood of joyous reform and relief is in the air, and the folks on the “right” can believe they are going to remove from office the man who may well be the worst president the nation has ever had.

So it would appear. Well, the realities behind the celebratory mood are harsh indeed. Polls hardly matter at all; very few voters are influenced by them. Advertising is an expensive conceit, for the overwhelming number of voters know how they are going to vote, and almost no minds will be changed. The blunders and miscues of the media and even the pratfalls of Ol’ Joe Biden The Faux Alcoholic make a certain amount of noise, and are forgotten — by everyone but the pathetically hopeful “wingnuts”, who look upon the incidents as cumulative victories in the war. No, even publicizing egregious outbursts like this won’t cause a single Obama voter to switch.

As cheerful as the GOP has a right to be at the moment, the campaign is nowhere near over, and a lot of what will happen before the votes are cast is just window dressing.

To repeat: this will be perhaps the dirtiest election ever. Those hundreds of thousands of dead and unqualified voters are the Democrats’ ace in the hole. A tsunami of election fraud is approaching.

Team Obama does not intend to lose. These are the folks who know how politics actually works. They brought you Fast and Furious (do you remember that, and do you realize they got away with it?) and so far, they have managed to capture the clearly overwhelming support of the academy, all the labor unions, the bureaucrats and government employees at all levels across the nation, most welfare recipients and others on government support, the schoolteachers, virtually all the black citizens and overwhelming segments of other minority communities, the intelligentsia, the artists, and — and the news media, which have embargoed the truth.

The coalition is rock-solid. It is cynical, and profoundly so; its energy is not wastefully drained by emotional patriotism or appeals to tradition and heritage. It is coldly focused on fundamentally altering the nature of US society. It seeks control. It will employ all available expedient means.

On the opposite side of the ideological chasm, the fragmented and frightened “right” has not defended capitalism forcefully. It has ignored Obama’s appallingly ignorant and absurd criticisms of the federal constitution; it has failed to hammer home the impracticality of inflating the currency in order to shower benefits on an increasingly unproductive society; it has not successfully attacked the bigotry and stunning stupidity of US foreign policy; it has refused to use the occupation of US territory by an alien mercenary army as a call to reform; and it appears afraid to state forcefully that while decent immigrants are welcome, lawbreakers are not. The GOP’s defeat is probable — indeed, virtually certain.

It won’t be just Romney’s doing. True, he’s no Reagan, who won lots of Democrats over. But that may not be important, for the “wingnuts” are not as united as they believe they are.

In the event that this newsletter must undertake an autopsy of the Romney/Ryan campaign, lethal disunity may well be found to be the proximate cause of death. Some people just can’t get past Romney’s Mormonism, or some of the tiny imperfections in his personality or background or manner in public. (If you want to be governed by saints, die.)

The petty reluctances that produce disunity on the “right”, in addition to a lot of lawbreaking on the “left”, appear likely to crush the GOP. The Senate may well remain in the hands of Obamites. The consequent harm done to the nation would be incalculable, for Obama would be unleashed. It would, indeed, be “on!”

Yet a GOP loss in 2012 may be a perfectly disguised blessing. As the economy moves from recession into catastrophic depression and Liberty is sharply curtailed, the electorate will come to understand just what was at stake in the election of 2012. At present, that understanding is partial, weak, and inarticulate. Pain will make it real.

War will come as the enemies of Western Civilization detect the stench of weakness. Economic decline will shatter the optimism of the citizenry, and the choices available to the individual will be reduced by an increasingly auhoritarian regime.

At present, absurd fantasies prevail, displacing reason, prudence, and honor.

The lessons must be learned. Once they are incorporated into the political process, reform will be possible.

For a contrasting opinion, see this brief essay.

More On Why And How Obama Will Probably Win

Back on the 23rd of July of this year, Barron’s published a short and interesting commentary by one Jim McTague. He tells the reader about a fellow named Reid Holloway who seems to be pretty good — not perfect — at predicting the outcome of elections. Here’s the core of Holloway’s reasoning:

…voters have become so closed-minded that Romney cannot carry any state that went for Democrat John Kerry in 2004 and Obama can’t carry any state that went for Republican John McCain in 2008. This is because a welfare mentality like Europe’s has a stronger grip on us than we appreciate. It’s not just the undercalsses who feel entitled to transfer payments from the wealthy: Banks, envergy companies, agricultural companies — you name it — have grown accustomed to special tax breaks.

Holloway predicts Obama will win in Florida, Iowa, Nevada, North Carolina, and Ohio — all crucial swing states. Romeny will take Colorado, Indiana, and Virginia. No model is foolproof, of course. Successive financial crises have taught us this. Holloway says that Romney would win if he defied the model and took Florida, North Carolina, and Ohio. Unless the Republican can turn his troubled campaingn around, however, the odds he will score this hat trick are steep.

A lot has happened since this prediction was published. The news would have been absolutely devastating to a Republican president, but, thanks to the media, Obama has been sheltered from a richly-deserved blizzard of criticism. Blunder after blunder and embarrassment after pratfall have been under-reported and ignored. While the GOP may celebrate the current dead-even poll results, many forget two things: dead people don’t respond to polls, but they vote in crucial states; and the election will be decided not by the popular vote, but by the electoral college. Romney looks fair to be yet another winner in the popular contest (in spite of those zombie voters) who lost because of the way the system is configured.

Trouble with you is
The trouble with me
Got two good eyes but we still don’t see
Come ’round the bend
You know it’s the end
The fireman screams and
The engine just gleams

The masthead includes a quote from the works of Susanne Langer.

The staff of The New Terrapin Gazette expresses its sincere gratitude to the many people who have gifted the world with Fedora Linux, Emacs, and Firefox.

Publisher: The Eagle Wing Palace of The Queen Chinee.