Posts

Posted on

Monopoly Power

12 April 2002

What governments do that is forbidden to all other entities is to use force to assert its will. An ethical government will use its power only defensively: to protect its borders, to protect the value of its currency, to protect the rights of innocents.

Human rights are not a gift from a loving god, nor are they a privilege granted by a benevolent government. Human rights are an invention of human intelligence, and exist for those who recognize and respect them. They are assumed by default at birth and are preserved by adherence to certain principles. (Children do not yet understand this, but can be taught. It is the responsibility of parents to provide a moral upbringing for their children. Some children are raised improperly, or never grow up, and some are mistreated, but in the absence of overwhelming evidence of neglect or abuse, children are the responsibility of their parents.)

Human rights are retained by those who respect them. When someone commits theft he shows a lack of respect for property, and society may justly require remuneration in the form of restitution or labor. When someone kidnaps or detains without just cause, he demonstrates a lack of respect for freedom, and society may justly deprive him of his freedom. When someone kills another maliciously or gratuitously, he makes clear that he has no respect for human life, and may well forfeit his own.

A free society will never deprive a person of his rights, but a just law may act in response when, by misbehavior, a person surrenders his rights. The principle is codified in our Constitution in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, each stating that no one shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

ANY behavior which is not coercive or fraudulent would be permitted in a free society. As a Member of Congress, I will NEVER act in opposition to these principles.

The most awesome and dangerous power of the Congress is the authority to declare war. Having served in the United States Air Force, and having placed myself voluntarily under the discretion of the Congress and my Commander-in-Chief, I do not take this prospect lightly.

Waging war against an aggressor comes closest to looking like a conflict between respect for human rights and the needs of national survival, but any perceived conflict is fictitious. Whether the example is Dresden or Hiroshima, the question of civilian casualties must weigh heavily on the minds of military defenders. When an enemy uses hostages as shields against retaliation they are already lost. The aggressor always bears the moral burden of placing innocents in harm’s way. A free society has the right to defend itself. Collateral damage is certainly a tragedy, but it is not, in and of itself, a crime.

update 180424: Collateral damage is ALWAYS a crime, but whose crime remains a relevant question. No defender has a duty to die, so aggressors retain culpability for innocent losses.

Many mystics and statists insist that atheists and anarchists CAN’T believe in rights because we don’t recognize their respective alleged grantors. Nonsense! Just as Kepler and Copernicus could build a rigorous astronomy on the observations of astrologers, just as Lavoisier and Priestley could found modern chemistry on the bones of alchemy, we can abstract a rational theory of rights.  (Ethics without religion is like astronomy without horoscopes.)

Rights are those expected reciprocal protocols of behavior — respect for person, property, prerogative, and precedence — that history has demonstrated lead to societies with the greatest degrees of liberty, security, prosperity, and longevity. It is proper to describe rights as being “violated” insofar as respect for rights is a reasonable expectation, and a breech of such an expectation would be contrary to the customs of that society. If you live in a civil society, you reasonably expect certain rights by virtue of that society’s existence.

Though calling them “rights” may have been an unfortunate misappellation. It seems to connote righteousness, moralism, and mysticism. But it’ll do.

I don’t know how I ever managed to type “ethical government” in the first place, but, recreating this file from notes, I had to rely on my “reportorial integrity” to get me through it.

Posted on

Predictions, in re Notre Dame

  1. The Cathedral of “Our Lady” will be rebuilt to almost exact specifications, as it has been extensively photographed.
  2. The costs of reconstruction will be borne mainly by millions of Catholics worldwide who will dig deeper into their hearts than sometimes their pockets will suggest, and by millions of the French, theist or not, who will give every sou they can to reclaim a piece of the glory of La Francaise. Millions of other contributors will pony up, cheerfully and willfully, believers and non-believers alike, as they cherish the achievements of art, architecture, and Western Civilization.
  3. The French and Parisian governments will make this project more difficult, more expensive, and more time consuming than necessary. (( 190416 ))

update 190420: correspondent MM, in re critics of the aid offered in the aftermath of the fire, seems impatient with leftie hysterics and race hustlers when she asks, “Why must everything be about race?”

Because if it’s not about race, then there’s a very real danger that it might be about integrity, thrift, hard work, or personal responsibility. Because my personal failings can be lain at my personal feet, but my race is beyond my control.

Posted on

SO (please don’t) SUE ME

Assuming there are any profits, of course. So far Piracy Press consists of me (Lethargy Lad, Editing Emir and Digital Doofus), my scanner/printer, Bill Gates’ software, and the United States Post Office. What I print is mostly given to my friends who haven’t complained enough for me to stop yet. Some have seen fit to subsidize my efforts, but any “profits” are still strictly imaginary.

Besides…

Piracy Press is a non-profit enterprise dedicated to the preservation and distribution of great art and ripping good yarns. We are strictly small time, and if you’re so self-absorbed as to take this to trial it can be certain that you MAY NOT HAVE (that would be both incidental and irrelevant) but you WOULD BE the biggest dick in the court.

Still, I’m eager for ya’ll to make contact, and please do. I’m too lazy to look all of ya up, and frankly a little embarrassed by the smallness of my “enterprise.” Still, I fancy that you’ll like what I’ve done and that maybe we actually can see some sort of profit (a little more generous to me than a hundred per cent for you, I hope), and, as always, there seems to be no limit to the amount of praise that my ego can soak up.
190514

Posted on

O’Neil’s “Question”

15 May 2019

Denys Cowan is a fine illustrator and storyteller and I do not hold him responsible for the execrable abomination that was Dennis O’Neil’s “Question.” Even as parody Alan Moore’s Rorschach is closer and kinder to Ditko’s vision than Denny’s pusilanimation.

update 210627: correspondent LW confesses that “[a]lthough [he] understood nothing of his morality the Vic Sage character the Question was [his] second favorite of the Charlton characters.”

The Question takes my top spot, both among Ditko creations and “Charlton properties” overall.
I also find it curious that I prefer both Steve Ditko‘s and Ayn Rand‘s “prototypes” to their grand opi (The Question vs Mr A and Fountainhead vs Atlas Shrugged). They both got it just about perfect, then felt the need to overdo it.
But I get that, too; to a committed zealot, any point worth making
is worth hammering into the ground.
(Hey! I come not to condemn zeal, but to embrace it!)

update 210628: correspondent BR “loved O’Neil’s Question,” but found “Ditko’s [and] Rand’s stuff… a bit childish and idealistic and way too trusting of capitalism.” He points out that “O’Neil was evolving the character and it worked.”

I love Denny O’Neil despite our differences in re his treatment of The Question. To his credit, of course, his treatment DID work, internally. That wasn’t my beef. His masterwork has to be his Batman, and I’m sorry he didn’t enjoy doing Superman, because that stuff was also brilliant. He thought that Superman was too powerful, and therefore too challenging for a writer to creditably challenge the character. It didn’t seem to me that Den actually disliked Superman, just he was lazy, and I respect that. Nevertheless, he did do a better job in the gritty alleyways of Gotham than the sparkling boulevards of Metropolis. O’Neil was best on Bats, but even his “Question” was good. It just wasn’t The Question.

update 230615: correspondent GH “explained it once as Mr. A is The Question before his morning coffee while sitting in traffic, and Rorschach is The Question on LSD coming down after a three day bender.”
That’s too apt to contest. In other views…

update 210629: correspondent BA points out that “the plural of opus is opera” and while I am grateful for the datum, and will take it under advisement, I’m not keen on it. Language evolves in many ways, mostly through (mis)use by the masses, but also occasionally by stubborn pricks like me and Will Shakespeare who seek new ways to bedazzle our readers. Like “hysteria” and “cool”, some words move away from their nascence and embrace new meanings. Be that as it may, I’m still not ready to say that “the media is” or “the united States is” and I’ll probably never give up the simple two syllable word for “data points” nor surrender to the debasement of “privilege.” More to BA‘s point, I think that “opera” should yield to the weight of connotation and confine itself to musical theatre. I’m pushing forward on “opi.”

illustrations by Steve Ditko and Denys Cowan.
The Question™ is the creation of Steve Ditko and is held de jure by
Detective Comics® and Warner Communications®.
Used without permission.

Posted on

Common Contempt

10 May 2019

Human beings seem to be very fond of criminalizing ridiculous non-crimes. Rather than confess their deep hatred of reason, liberty, and honesty, they endeavor instead to sanctify their bigotry by throwing such incantations as “Sharia Law,” “Mosaic Traditions,” or “Public Order” at them, hoping apparently that the righteous labels might stick to the grimy surfaces of their biases. They are thin disguises that only fool the willingly credulous. Those of us who remain immune to such duplicitous diversions, however, can readily see the nonsense for the fetid fertilizer that it is.

Of all the ridiculous non-crimes that exercise Americans‘ imaginations, perhaps “contempt of Congress” is the most mysterious. What decent honorable human being is NOT contemptuous of these bands of bandits (pick a legislature)?

Contempt for the Congress is so natural and reasonable that it invites a special reversal of Anglo-American jurisprudence. Inspired in part by the Nancy Grace standard, wherein all suspects are to be presumed guilty until proven black or female, the Presumption of Innocence should be provisionally suspended. In the case of Courtiers and Congress-mites, we should all be presumed Contemptuous until proven to be Capo, Stukashi, Snitches, Weasels, or other such sycophants.

Posted on

In Defense of Elitism

Advanced placement and honors classes cannot be “supremacist” — white or otherwise — because placement into those classes are based on performance and not on appearance
(except maybe for “Advanced Supermodelling”).

On the other hand, true to accusation, they ARE elitist, and we understand that “elitism” is anathema to resentful leftists.
But so what? They’re elitist, too. And so are you.

Don’t believe it? Don’t like the idea?
You don’t have to. It’s still true.

Suppose your cat were sick. Would you take him to a mechanic?
A plumber? The grocer or a tavern?
To the butcher shop or to a taxidermist?
Well, maybe as a last resort, but…
NO! Of course not! You’d seek out one of those elites, a specialist who worked hard to distinguish himself from other tradesmen.
You want a veterinarian for your cat,
not a financial planner or a community organizer!

In fact, we’re ALL elitists! For some reason some people are not only ashamed of it, but they’re also very good at kidding themselves.
191104

curious update 191109: I still don’t know whether the Journal printed this piece. (Why wouldn‘t they? My work is always first rate!) The response (from editor LM), while encouraging simply because it is a response, is nevertheless ambiguous. I’ve been regularly sending stuff to the War Street Journal, Pravda Sivoydne (“Truth” Today), and my local Demoblican mouthpiece. USA Toady has an obedient robot that consistently acknowledges my submissions, conveying editorial’s regrets that they can’t print all they get. Neither the Journal nor Our Hometeam Fishwrap have ever acknowledged any submissions, and as far as I know the Journal has never printed any either. I expect the local’s bar is a little lower than the nationals’ so I occasionally make that scene.

But, alas, still no sign of my work in wider circulation. I can’t be sure. As vain as I am, I’m still cheap. I don’t see those expensive papers every day, and I pay for them even less frequently.

Maybe I’ll never know. This could be LM’s clever way of saying, “Congratulations! You made the cut! Watch for your deathless words in an upcoming edition!” Or maybe I just touched a nerve. In any event, the sentiments of his response, via e-mail, were at least pertinent to my own. And whether or not this is his own composition, he does not say. For all its heralding hopes and joy, it is altogether quite the ambiguous message. Still…

Spurn not the nobly born
With love affected,
Nor treat with virtuous scorn
The well-connected.
High rank involves no shame —
We boast an equal claim,
With him of humble name,
To be respected.

Posted on

Courting the Backlash Vote?

29 October 2019

I probably wouldn’t vote for this ticket. I expect they are both too deeply enmired in Democrat orthodoxy for me to support them, but they still have my sympathies. And of course their entrance into the race would create serious turbulence in Lefties’ minds, ostensibly dedicated as they claim to be to such notions of “live and let live” (in spite of their opposition to the same principle for those who might stray from their contemporaneous catechisms).

Irrespective of the possibilities of “abusive behavior” or “undue influence” or “misappropriation of public funds” — all legitimate concerns which MIGHT be relevant — I think they both caved too readily to popular bigotry. If legal charges are to be brought, then let them come. Otherwise, about ninety-nine percent of the time, the way you swing your wingwang is the least interesting thing about you.

Frankly I’d like to see more of a fight on behalf of “Keep your face out of my personal business!”

Posted on

The Identity Offense

7 October 2019 — Nobody “suffers” from Stockholm Syndrome… except those of us who don’t have it. Stockholm Syndrome isn’t the affliction. It’s the hostages’ relief, a palliative, their cure for despair. Those who enjoy its benefits are more at ease. They feel more secure as they align their fates with their abusers’. At its most ardent Stockholm Syndrome manifests itself in concentration camp capo, Soviet era stukashi, and timeless schoolyard snitches. It’s all around us, from the abused spouse to the faithful Demoblican voter, and they will identify themselves for you by saying such things as:
“I am Negan.”
“It’s for your own good.”
“They brought it on themselves.”
“In America, We the People are the government.”

18 October 2019 — Could there be a more wholesome or endearing endorsement of a President’s foreign policy than a Bipartisan Rebuke? For decades Demoblicans and Repucrats have been hard pressed to find a hot spot on Earth they didn’t wish to extinguish with floods of American blood or to bury under mountains of native corpses.
And it’s all worked out so well, this regime change paradigm of theirs! Chased the Commies out of Korea and Vietnam. Got rid of Iran’s troublesome Mossadegh and installed that steady satrap Reza Pahlavi. Today Iran remains America’s staunchest ally. Secular despots were toppled in Iraq and Libya and now those states are Models of Democracy.
And things were going just swimmingly in Syria, too, until that peacenik American rabble got wind of it and elected Mr Trump. In other news, NATO ally signals intent to murder Kurds. Following Ronald (“Ol’ Cut’n’Run”) Reagan’s valiant example of retreat from Beirut, Trump declines to assist NATO ally or Kurds.
It may be a pretty thin non-intervention, but I’ll take it over 
Lady MacBubba’s “We came. We saw. He died. Ha ha ha!”

“The Identity Defense” (28 October 2019) — What if, instead of blaming an imaginary car-jacker, Susan Smith had simply “identified” as childless? Leftie orthodoxy puts those penis packing proto patriarchs in the backseat in the Wrong and Saintly Susan, in search of her Best Self, in the Right. Clearly, they were never her allies, and they did nothing to help her in her Quest for Actualization.

Posted on

Austrian Dominance?

7 October 2019

It was with no small measure of surprise that I read (Wall Street Journal October 5&6 edition: “Team Liberty”) that, “by the end of the 20th century, the ideas of the Austrian School would [come to] dominate global economic policies.”

“Dominate?” If I’d read “influence” I probably would not have blinked. The Austrian School’s influence has grown and ebbed over the generations, but I’ve yet to witness its DOMINATION.

Perhaps one could educate this (apparently) poor scholar. I do remember Bubba’s disingenuous claim that “the era of Big government [was] over.” Other than that, what else might I have missed? What globally dominating institution (transnational corporation OR government) has uniformly renounced price controls, tariffs, income and capital gains taxation, prohibition, prior restraint, central banking, or fiat currency?

To the contrary, that litany of crimes is actually contemporaneous orthodoxy.

These comments are sponsored by The Confederate Mint (purveyors of metallic securities in gold, silver, copper, and lead).  For sample sheets of Metallic Certificates (total face value One Tenth Silver Dollar) send One Silver Dime plus a self-addressed stamped envelope; or Four United States Legal Tender Federal Reserve “Dollars” in scrip, check, or money order, to Greigh Area Associates, c/o Gene Greigh //  401 Rio Concho Drive, #105;  San Angelo, Texas;  76903

Posted on

Listening Between the Lines & other Losses

“Insufficient Eyes” (12 January 2019)
I have only two eyes.
If I were to keep (fix, sustain, do not remove) my eyes (note plural usage, meaning both of them) on the prize, there would be no eye left for anything else, including keeping it on the ball.
“Why did you run into that player?”
“I didn’t see him.”
“Why didn’t you watch where you were running?”
“You told us to keep our eyes on the ball. I was watching the ball.”
Coach didn’t like that answer. I think this may have been the same psycho-terrorist who insisted that I “Don’t try! Just do it!” But of course he would never explain how ANYTHING is EVER done without trying.
It could be that I missed his larger lesson;
it may have had something to do with running laps.

“The Consequences of Fakery” (1 September 2019)
The consequences of fakery are varied, ranging from trivial to dire.
In the social or emotional realm, fakery can [aggravate emotional fragility] or, more seriously, [compromise a] reputation.
In accounting or actuarial work it leads to bankruptcy and disgrace.
In the material realm (carpentry, engineering, surgery) people die. 
update 210105:  In the political realm, fakes are elected and re-elected and millions are financially ruined and thousands die.

(1 September 2019) A fool and his honeys are soon half-way fed up with each other. I will testify to that. As this fool never sought divorce, my hapless honeys were obliged to carry the whole load themselves. And when you work out the averages you get half, so I remain correct (one of my many flaws — no wonder they ditched me)! : update 9 January 2021 — the beat goes on…

“Diggin’ up Bones” (6 September 2019)
“I’m diggin’ up bones… exhumin’ things that’s better left alone”?
The authors of this song (Paul Overstreet, Al Gore, and Nat Stuckey) expressed it as a declarative sentence, and while singing it vocalist Randy Travis betrays not a hint of a Valley Girl accent, so there is no good reason to infer that it is a question. Yet I have misquoted it as a question because I think it is a very good question. For me.
What am I doing here with all this writing and hoping for feedback and other silly or stupid activity?
I’m diggin’ up bones. When patterns are presented by dynamic processes (like human beings, f’rinstance) sometimes an exhumation or other deeper analysis will yield useful results.
Other times it will blow up in my face. Boy Howdy!

“Another Case of ‘I’m NOT My Daddy!'” (15 September 2019)
Hip texters (or textie hipsters?) may wish to assert their digital prowess and distance themselves from “old people” who can spell (Wall Street Journal weekend edition: “Tales of ‘Woah’”). That’s fine in their clique. That’s what slang is for, to conceal meaning and to exclude outsiders. However, if one wishes to communicate with strangers, correct grammar and spelling remain key to clear meaning.
It might be helpful to consult with Noah Webster over the probable pronunciation of “woah.” Meanwhile, I’m not so old that I don’t remember movies. When Keanu Reeves skidded to a stop at the roof’s edge, he did not say “woe-uh.” He released the single breathy syllable, “Whoa!” (pronounced Hwoe).
English phonics can be confusing; ask someone who doesn’t pronounce his name kanidjit (“Knight”). Intentionally mispronouncing and misspelling words or reversing definitions (“sick” – “bad” – “privilege”) doesn’t help.

“Who Needs to ‘Learn How to Lose’?” (20 September 2019)
This is one of those “valuable team/sports/life lessons” we hear too much about. Losing goes on all the time. It takes almost no effort to lose. In fact, “no effort” is often one of the key elements of losing. Anyone presuming to teach you “how to lose” is wasting his own time (his own privilege) and insulting you (your own call.) If you’ve ever come in other than first or misplaced your keys, you already know how to lose. It’s a drag.
Maybe team sports are intended to teach me how to like it.

“Listening Between the Lines” (29 September 2019)
Because…
“Would you like a receipt?”
“I’m good.”
“I’m delighted you’re good. Would you like a receipt?”
“I don’t need one.”
“I realize. Nobody needs a receipt. Would you like one?”
“I said NO!”
“Thank you.”

Janson Jacket (28 December 2019)
Is she wondering how pleasant and charming he might be?
Or giving woodland survival tips?
Was that “Wood gnat be sweet”
or “Would Nat be sweet?”

A Brief Encounter (10 August 2020)
(co-authored by Huey Lewis —  “Yes, it’s true!”)
Customer:  “…and the same.”
Clerk:  “A dray?”
Customer:  “Yes!”