Liberty Relearned

Some of you may remember reading this piece from the Liberty Relearned blog a while back:  So, you want to compare Trump and his followers to Hitler and the Nazis?  That was mainly regarding a quote by Donny Deutsch (remember him?) comparing Trump supporters to Nazis because of his handling of the illegal immigrants.  “If you vote for Trump, then you, the voter, you, not Donald Trump, are standing at the border, like Nazis.”

Sadly, such reductio ad Hitlerum arguments still persist, especially coming from the Left, and continue to be aimed at Trump and his supporters.  This is an intellectually lazy argument. It often fails to establish any true parallel between either Trump's policies, or the beliefs of the rank-and-file Trump supporter and those common to the violent and authoritarian fascist regimes of the 20th century. They are filled with misrepresentations of the former President's words, and misconceptions about actual, historical fascism.

So is Trump the next Hitler?  Are his followers Nazis?  Are MAGA Republicans fascists?

If Trump is a fascist, especially a Nazi, he's certainly a very poor one.  If his followers are fascists, they sure cling to a lot of non-fascists ideals.  One of the defining traits of Nazis was their violent antisemitism. Trump ended the Iran nuclear agreement, something that the Israelis celebrated, and their Prime Minister at the time called for in front of the UN.  This paved the way for one of Trump's in-laws, one of his Jewish in-laws to broker a peace deal between Israel and several neighboring Arab states.  He then moved the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. These are things that a true Nazi would have a hard time doing, and even a harder time selling to his supporters.

COVID offered the perfect chance for any world leader to go full authoritarian, if not full fascist like Trudeau in Canada. Fascism calls for a supremely strong central government. So, what did Trump do?  He let the counties federalist system work, and allowed the sates, not the central government to make the calls.  Some states did go the authoritarian route, those were almost entirely blue (Democrat) states.  A true fascist would mandate such things as inoculations and mask wearing.  Trump didn't but his successor did to the greatest extent he could.

Another central tenet of fascism is micromanagement in the affairs of business.  Fascism doesn't nationalize industries the way that typical socialism does, it merely asserts control over corporations, acting as a sort of chairman of the board on every board of directors in every corporation.  The illusion of private ownership remains under fascism, while effective control of companies goes to the state.  Everything inside the state, nothing outside the state, and nothing against the state.  One of the very first things Trump did upon taking office was to reduce the federal regulatory burden on companies, literally the antithesis of fascistic rule!

Those who use the reductio ad Hitlerum argument do a disservice to the memory of all who suffered under actual Nazi-ism.  They also look foolish to those who know history and especially those who've studied actual fascism. Sadly, many on the left in particular, in their arrogance, don't know enough to be embarrassed, even in the face of proof their assertions are logically and historically wrong.

John Galt's Speech

Pt III: Individuality

One of the themes of Atlas Shrugged, and of the Objectivist philosophy of Ayn Rand is the idea of all rights are individual rights.  She believed in the rights of minorities, and the smallest minority was the individual. Through John Galt's speech, she ties the idea that one owns oneself and that free will is one's chief possession.

“That which you call your soul or spirit is your consciousness, and that which you call ‘free will’ is your mind’s freedom to think or not, the only will you have, your only freedom, the choice that controls all the choices you make and determines your life and your character.”

Galt here, refutes the notion that anyone but him has a right to his life and happiness:

“Just as I support my life, neither by robbery nor alms, but by my own effort, so I do not seek to derive my happiness from the injury or the favor of others, but earn it by my own achievement. Just as I do not consider the pleasure of others as the goal of my life, so I do not consider my pleasure as the goal of the lives of others. Just as there are no contradictions in my values and no conflicts among my desires-so there are no victims and no conflicts of interest among rational men, men who do not desire the unearned and do not view one another with a cannibal’s lust, men who neither make sacrifice nor accept them.”

Again, Galt asserts he owes no one his life and happiness, nor does anybody owe him theirs.  He chides those who voluntarily make themselves subservient to others. He justifies morality of acting in one's own self-interest with the notion that one must reciprocate that same right to others.  Rather than accept natural obligation to others, he follows an ethos of mutual non-obligation, except as a voluntary act of self-interest on the part of all parties.

“Do you ask what moral obligation I owe to my fellow men? None-except the obligation I owe to myself, to material objects and to all of existence: rationality. I deal with men as my nature and their demands: by means of reason. I seek or desire nothing from them except such relations as they care to enter of their own voluntary choice. It is only with their mind that I can deal and only for my own self-interest, when they see that my interest coincides with theirs. When they don’t, I enter no relationship; I let dissenters go their way and I do not swerve from mine. I win by means of nothing but logic and I surrender to nothing but logic. I do not surrender my reason or deal with men who surrender theirs. I have nothing to gain from fools or cowards; I have no benefits to seek from human vices: from stupidity, dishonesty or fear. The only value men can offer me is the work of their mind. When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit.”

Galt's speech ends with what one could call the “Objectivist Creed” ....

“You will win when you are ready to pronounce the oath I have taken at the start of my battle-and for those who wish to know the day of my return, I shall now repeat it to the hearing of the world:

“I swear-by my life and my love of it-that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine. -Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

Saturday, September 17th was Constitution Day in America. Happy 235th Birthday to the U.S. Constitution!  Why does the Constitution matter?  Let it explain in its own words:  "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."  The Constitution remains the greatest basis for a nation's government ever written.  Many countries have borrowed from it, none have improved upon it.  Strong as it is, it's only as strong as the Supreme Court Justices charged with following and interpreting it, and only as strong as the Citizens of the US are willing to allow it to be.  Hopefully the next 235 years will see it remain as strong, if not stronger, as it is now.

Saturday, September 17th was Constitution Day in America. Happy 235th Birthday to the U.S. Constitution!  Why does the Constitution matter?  Let it explain in its own words:  "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."  The Constitution remains the greatest basis for a nation's government ever written.  Many countries have borrowed from it, none have improved upon it.  Strong as it is, it's only as strong as the Supreme Court Justices charged with following and interpreting it, and only as strong as the Citizens of the US are willing to allow it to be.  Hopefully the next 235 years will see it remain as strong, if not stronger, as it is now.  

This week in JP's Dystopic Journal, we continue with our analysis of John Galt's speech from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. One of the central themes that runs through all of Rand's writings is the idea of individualism.  Growing up in the Soviet Union, she saw first-hand the evils of collectivism.  John Galt's speech near the end of Atlas Shrugged serves as a manifesto of sorts for Rand's Objectivist philosophy.  Rand, though Galt, lays out the principles of Objectivism in his speech, a 57-page monologue. Most if it provides justification for people to act in their own rational self-interest before anyone else's.  It refutes the notion that man should be forced to live for the sake of other men.  Rather than men being obligated to each other, Galt professes his preference for mutual non-obligation, he'll not be obliged to live for another person, and no other person should be obliged to live for him. 

Until next time,

Stay healthy, happy, and free! 

JP's Dystopic Journal continues with a further examination of John Galt's speech in Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand.  One of the themes of his speech, and a theme of Rand's is the idea that human beings are meant to have the capacity to act in their own best interests and the best interests of their loved ones. We should not outsource our decision making to others when it comes to matters of critical personal importance.  Adding to Galt's/Rand's commentary, I suggest The Creator gave us the gift of free will.  It's our ability to choose from different paths and select our own destinies that sets us apart from both the animals and the Angels.  Humans being their best selves and utilizing their gifts of life and liberty is good and moral.  Not doing those things, or depriving others from either life or free will is bad, immoral.

Until next time, stay healthy, happy, and free!

-JP Mac

In this episode, I talk about two traumatic events that greatly affected entire countries.  On September 8th, 2022, the United Kingdom lost their Queen, Elizabeth II.  Elizabeth was the longest reigning queen in Britian's history.  She will be sorely missed by Britain and the Western World. She is succeeded by King Charles III.  Charles has been outspoken in recent years on Leftist causes such as climate change and has attended the WEF summit in Davos, Switzerland.  He's going to have to put those days behind him and rule from the center.  When in doubt, he should ask himself-- "What would mother do?"  God save the King.

The other traumatic event I talk about is the terrorist attack on the US on September 11th, 2001.  There was the immediate shock and horror the attacks on Washington, DC and New York caused, then there were many events that stemmed directly or indirectly from 9-11, like the invasion of Afghanistan and our ignominious surrender nearly 20 years later. The attacks lead to the Global War on Terror which provided the momentum needed to invade Iraq.  Our untimely withdrawal from Iraq lead to the establishment of the ISIS caliphate in the Levant.

9-11 brings up painful memories to those who experienced it either in person or on the television at the time.  Should we try to forget about it?  To do that would do a disservice to all who gave their lives, especially those firemen, policemen and first responders who committed so many conspicuous acts of courage and valor on that day and the days that followed.  We cannot forget for one brief period; Americans of all stripes were united.  We cannot forget the men and women of our armed forces and the scarifies they mad as a direct result of the attacks. We can never, ever forget 9-11-01.

In this episode, I talk about two traumatic events that greatly affected entire countries.  On September 8th, 2022, the United Kingdom lost their Queen, Elizabeth II.  Elizabeth was the longest reigning queen in Britian's history.  She will be sorely missed by Britain and the Western World. She is succeeded by King Charles III.  Charles has been outspoken in recent years on Leftist causes such as climate change and has attended the WEF summit in Davos, Switzerland.  He's going to have to put those days behind him and rule from the center.  When in doubt, he should ask himself-- "What would mother do?"  God save the King.  

The other traumatic event I talk about is the terrorist attack on the US on September 11th, 2001.  There was the immediate shock and horror the attacks on Washington, DC and New York caused, then there were many events that stemmed directly or indirectly from 9-11, like the invasion of Afghanistan and our ignominious surrender nearly 20 years later. The attacks lead to the Global War on Terror which provided the momentum needed to invade Iraq.  Our untimely withdrawal from Iraq lead to the establishment of the ISIS caliphate in the Levant. 

9-11 brings up painful memories to those who experienced it either in person or on the television at the time.  Should we try to forget about it?  To do that would do a disservice to all who gave their lives, especially those firemen, policemen and first responders who committed so many conspicuous acts of courage and valor on that day and the days that followed.  We cannot forget for one brief period; Americans of all stripes were united.  We cannot forget the men and women of our armed forces and the scarifies they mad as a direct result of the attacks. We can never, ever forget 9-11-01.  

JP's Dystopic Journal continues with a further examination of John Galt's speech in Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand.  One of the themes of his speech, and a theme of Rand's is the idea that human beings are meant to have the capacity to act in their own best interests and the best interests of their loved ones. We should not outsource our decision making to others when it comes to matters of critical importance.  Added to Galt's/Rand's commentary, I suggest The Creator gave us the gift of free will.  It's our ability to choose from different paths and select our own destinies that sets us apart from both the animals and the Angels.  Humans being their best selves and utilizing their gifts of life and liberty is good and moral.  Not doing those things, or depriving others from either life or free will is bad, immoral. 

Until next time, stay healthy, happy, and free! 

-JP Mac

Recently, in Philadelphia, against a garish crimson and black backdrop reminiscent of every fascist trope, President Biden made a speech in which he demonized a large portion of the American electorate. He talks about “enemies of democracy” who he names as “MAGA Republicans”.  Though he claims that he speaks only of a small minority of Republicans, he leaves open to interpretation just who he means– from the January 6th rioters and their like, to anyone who flies a Trump flag, or had a Trump yard sign on their lawn.  Here’s as small sample of what he said:

“We’re all called, by duty and conscience, to confront extremists who will put their own pursuit of power above all else. Democrats, independents, mainstream Republicans: We must be stronger, more determined, and more committed to saving American democracy than MAGA Republicans are to — to destroying American democracy.” — President Biden, September 1, 2022.

Most of his speech goes like this, repeating the same canards about Trump supporters being a danger to democracy, and supporting violence.

The podcast features most of his speech, laced with my biting and dare I say, witty commentary.

Not one word of his speech talks about the real problems we face in America, rising inflation, skyrocketing crime rates, or the cost of energy.  Besides demonizing Trump and his supporters, the purpose of his speech seems to be to distract us from these real problems.

Recently, in Philadelphia, against a garish crimson and black backdrop reminiscent of every fascist trope, President Biden made a speech in which he demonized a large portion of the American electorate. He talks about "enemies of democracy" who he names as "MAGA Republicans".  Though he claims that he speaks only of a small minority of Republicans, he leaves open to interpretation just who he means-- from the January 6th rioters and their like, to anyone who flies a Trump flag, or had a Trump yard sign on their lawn.  Here's as small sample of what he said:

"We’re all called, by duty and conscience, to confront extremists who will put their own pursuit of power above all else. Democrats, independents, mainstream Republicans: We must be stronger, more determined, and more committed to saving American democracy than MAGA Republicans are to — to destroying American democracy." -- President Biden, September 1, 2022.  

Most of his speech goes like this, repeating the same canards about Trump supporters being a danger to democracy, and supporting violence. 

The podcast features most of his speech, laced with my biting and dare I say, witty commentary.  

Not one word of his speech talks about the real problems we face in America, rising inflation, skyrocketing crime rates, or the cost of energy.  Besides demonizing Trump and his supporters, the purpose of his speech seems to be to distract us from these real problems.  

Until next time, 

Stay healthy, happy and free!  And Happy Labor Day! 

- JP Mac

In Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand wrote possibly her most iconic passage of fiction. In it, a mysterious figure comes out of the shadows after withdrawing from public life some twelve years earlier. During those twelve years of self-imposed exile, he formed his own community of talented, like-minded people he’s enticed to go on “strike” from an ungrateful society consumed with taking their achievements for their own. As a result of the strike depriving society of the inventors and entrepreneurs who made it run, the world has fallen into a state of disrepair and despair. Near the end of the story, Galt returns to explain his actions is this famous monologue known to us as “This is John Galt Speaking”.

One of the chief themes of Galt’s speech is the idea that society had begun to hold sacrifice as its highest virtue, but Galt points out that in society’s twisted morality, societies concept of sacrifice was not that of noble self-sacrifice, it was responding to the demands of others that was held as a virtue. Virtue, in this fallen system, was to accede to the demands of others, even to the point of going against one’s own best self-interest. This “virtue” of sacrifice stemmed from or perhaps caused a widespread sense of entitlement. People had stared to believe that they were entitled to the efforts of others.

We live in a world where countries have been convinced to sacrifice large portions of their economy, particularly in energy and agriculture. Over the past few decades, Germany as invested in renewable fuels such as wind and solar. Now, with war in Eastern Europe, it’s lost a large supply of gas and oil. It, and other countries will struggle to make up the difference and renewables will not be enough. Sri Lanka was convinced to undertake self-destructive economic measures in the name of achieving a high Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) score. It took out loans it could never repay and decimated its agricultural sector to the point that its people were going hungry. Other countries have followed Sri Lanka down this path. The Netherlands is deliberately regulating nearly a third of its farms out of business. Canada is acting in a similar fashion. Countries are practicing self-immolation in the name of the greater good.

“Happiness is the successful state of life, pain is an agent of death. Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one’s values. A morality that dares to tell you to find happiness in the renunciation of your happiness-to value the failure of your values-is an insolent negation of morality. A doctrine that gives you, as an ideal, the role of a sacrificial animal seeking slaughter on the altars of others, is giving you death as your standard. By the grace of reality and the nature of life, man-every man-is an end in himself, he exists for his own sake, and the achievement of his own happiness is his highest moral purpose.”– John Galt, in Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand

The global elite would not agree with John Galt here. They say that a man’s highest purpose is to serve his fellow man. They say that, but their policies when put into practice, serve mainly them. These oligarchs and technocrats ask the Dutch farmer, the Canadian trucker, and the West Virginian coal miner to sacrifice their livelihoods for the good of their fellow man. They call the American that wants to be comfortable in their home during the summer as selfish, and they will call the European who wishes to be warm in their home during the winter selfish as well. Far from Galt’s words, the words of globalists such as Klaus Schwab are: “You’ll own nothing and be happy.”