The real genius of modern democracy is that it makes the citizen feel that the government and its workings are somehow the product of his own aspirations. If he wants more money for his retirement, he presumes he can get [this] — provided only that enough fellow citizens share his desire. If he wants to go to war, that too is up to him and his fellow voters. If he wants to spend more money on space exploration or ban people from saying prayers in bars, the majority — of which he feels he should be part — can do that too.previous
Friday, August 31, 2012
It is amazing how so many people in the world are passionately loyal to the republic as an ideal while widely despising politicians in general. Bizarre as that is, the low opinion most people have for the vast majority of politicians is one of the most valuable weapons in the monarchist arsenal.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
The Anti-Gnostic gives some perspective on the prospects of restoration of real monarchy.
The Anti-Gnostic concludes:
Practically speaking, even if (1) the legitimate bloodlines could be traced and (2) the property restored, the institution itself is utterly gone, reduced, as Taki notes, to a purely ceremonial role. The extant order and all existing public property claims would have to disappear, and some putative neo-monarch start again from Year Zero. Not impossible, but extremely unlikely.Quite dim, to say the least.
Monday, August 27, 2012
Today starts the circus in Tampa, Florida.
To its “honor” we give you Blimey Cow:
Ben Swann on the pre-convention process:
And Rachel Maddow on the same:
As the phrase goes, same same but different:
Dr. Tom Woods spoke just ahead of the convention:
Sunday, August 26, 2012
Progressives tend to view their fights and battles as legitimate. No matter how many times, no matter with how high a frequency, they fight a battle and lose, it is always legitimate to come back and fight again.
However, when they win, anyone not bowing down and accepting the win for now and forevermore, is “stuck in the past as the world moves on.” This even applies when the progressives have succeeded at defining the moon as a green cheese.
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Friday, August 24, 2012
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
We know government schools haven't been doing a particular good job at education. And of course, private educational institutions could do better as well.
Mr. Scott H. Young is a young Canadian entrepreneur who has a project going where concept is to take MIT's four year computer science curriculum in just twelve months without taking classes or being enrolled. Here is a TEDx talk he has given on the project:
Mr. Young has a YouTube channel for the project and his own website. He also has a free e-book on fast learning.
Mr. Josh Taylor is interviewed on The Lew Rockwell Show about education.
Professor Daphne Koller gives a TED talk on online education.
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Monday, August 20, 2012
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Saturday, August 18, 2012
Friday, August 17, 2012
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Monday, August 13, 2012
Sunday, August 12, 2012
Over at the Mail on Sunday, Peter Hitchens rants against what's going on in London. He also followed up the next day.
The Mad Monarchist gives an analysis.
Over at LewRockwell.com, Finian Cunningham laments the security measures.
At The LRC Blog, Butler Shaffer reflects on gold, medals, and fiat currency.
Over at his blog Reflections of a Young Fogey, Rafal Heydel-Mankoo reflects too. He also presents some info on an order.
Saturday, August 11, 2012
Bill Bonner is interviewed on The Money and Wealth Show:
A couple of days prior on the same show, Marc Faber is interviewed:
Back in June, also on the same show, Doug Casey was interviewed:
Posting videos here does not imply full endorsement of what is said in those videos, as a general rule, not just for this post. In Mr. Casey's case, I would like to express explicitly that not everything is endorsed, most notably what he says on “Louis Seize,” but at least he understands that what came after was worse. That being said, there is much wisdom in what Mr. Casey says.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Thursday, August 9, 2012
It is interesting to say the least to see how these bombings up until these days are “justified” in particular by “right-wingers.” In a false dichotomy continued conventional warfare would have been the alternative and worse than the nuking. Never in this alternative narrative is the assumption of unconditional surrender considered. It is always the Japanese that were stubborn for willing to continue. It is never the allies who were stubborn for their conditions of unconditional surrender.
Moreover, in defense of the nuclear warmongers' narrative, the opposition to it is always portrayed as removed from reality and in particular from the center stage. Those opposed to this narrative are labeled as ignorant leftists.
Dwight D. Eisenhower told us some years later:
I was against it on two counts. First, the Japanese were ready to surrender, and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon.Is Eisenhower some ignorant leftist removed from reality as well? He was in particular removed from the center stage of the war? Or perhaps he was even being a historical revisionist where he sat as supreme commander during the war?
Of course, we cannot know for sure how an alternative reality would have played out. However, the supporters of the nuking portray their scenario of continued conventional warfare with likely worse losses as the realistic one, whereas scenarios of early surrender are portrayed as bordering on pure fantasy at best.
This again begs a question: Was Eisenhower a day-dreamer?
There are more quotes here.
Might I add that the relative strengthening and weakening of the Soviet Union and Japan respectively in this area of the world likely and arguably made it easier for Mao? Oh, but I forget, only communists make arguments against the nuking...
Over at LewRockwell.com:gives his thoughts (H/T: The Pittsford Perennialist).
Over at the Hit & Run blog, Lucy Steigerwald reflects. So does Anthony Gregory over at The Beacon Blog.
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
Ben Swann explains the connection between oil and gold, with Ron Paul as an addendum:
Marc Faber gives his thoughts on what's coming:
RT's Lauren Lyster interviews Lew Rockwell:
There is some good news with a victory for United States Representative Ron Paul:
Ron Paul interviewed on Bloomberg Television about the achievement:
Judge Napolitano gives comments:
Ben Swann on the audit issue:
An older demonstration of some of the problems:
Congressman Paul questions the Treasury Secretary of those United States:
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Politicos have been trying to stop the business of a chain business, Chick-Fil-A, whose COO, Dan T. Cathy, opposes gay “marriage.” Fox News reports. So does the Daily Mail.
The Mad Monarchist analyzes the mess we have.
Monday, August 6, 2012
Two years short of a century ago today, following the first day of battle, the Austro-Hungarian Empire declared war on the Russian Empire.
The successor to the Western Roman Empire and the successor to the Eastern Roman Empire were at full war with each other.
The old order was at each other at gunpoint.
Sunday, August 5, 2012
98 years ago today, the first battle of the Great War began.
The day before, those United States had declared neutrality. The same day, the United Kingdom declared war on Germany.
The night before, Sir Edward Grey had given a speech in the House of Commons about the lamps going out all over Europe. That was the day Imperial Germany and the Third French Republic declared war on each other.
Yet two days before that again, the empires of Russia and Germany had declared war on each other.
In less than ten days after the declaration of war on the Kingdom of Serbia made in Bad Ischl, a full-scale European war was loose.
Saturday, August 4, 2012
The past month was a month of apparent turbulence for the House of Lords, as it was covered at this weblog.
Just recently, the British Prime Minister apparently withdrew support of reform plans. So The Independent reports. It is quite telling though that the same news report describes a “reform” that includes ejecting the hereditary peers as “limited reform.”
Peter Hitchens followed up his previous posts with a Mail on Sunday column last month.
Bruce Anderson gives his thoughts, as he categorizes the positions on the issue as sentamentalist, restrainer, and federalist.
Mr. Anderson seems to think that restraining the House of Commons needs a democratically elected Upper House to achieve that. Given the democratist-absolutist sentiment under which we unfortunately live, he may have a big point. However, two democratically elected chambers never really restrain democracy itself, and as the past century has shown us, two democratically elected chambers in the federal legislature of those United States hasn't impressively restrained government power.
We need to restrain democracy. Here is where a lot of debaters in the Lords reform debate get it right. They speak up against tyranny of the majority. Unfortunately, they rather quickly fall off, apparently most worried about maintaining the supremacy or primacy of the elected house. Bertrand de Jouvenel wrote many years ago that the House of Lords was reduced to a debating club in 1911. It seems many want to keep it that way.
Seemingly, they also want to get rid of the last of the hereditary peers. Some even do so after, correctly, having just previously spoken up for good aspects of hereditary.
Why do they want to get rid of hereditary? They may privately be in support of the hereditary peers, but perhaps careerism or not wanting to take this particular battle makes them go with the flow and throw them out. Whatever their reasons may be, it is not particularly heroic.
A hybrid house has been put forward in the debate.
Even Rafal Heydel-Mankoo is apparently in favor of banishing the hereditaries, with a hybrid house with no hereditary component. The three equally large components would be: electees, political appointees, and civil society appointees.
Over at Res Publica's blog, Dwayne Menezes argued for hereditary peerage about one and a half years ago (in two parts). Mr. Menezes also had a proposal for a hybrid house, with three equally large components; hereditary peers and bishops, political appointees, and civil society appointees.
Reform of the House of Lords is needed. A hybrid house may be what there should be, although yours truly has great sympathy for more heredity and tradition than one third, but for sure eviction of the hereditary peers is not the way to go.
Friday, August 3, 2012
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Four score years ago today, King Manuel II of Portugal was brought to his final resting place in Lisbon after his suspicious demise in England on the day a month earlier at an age of only 42.
Previously elsewhere: Radical Royalist