Tampering with elections – the real solution

By Nathan Barton

We know it is a problem – meddling or tampering or interfering with free elections.  It is a nearly daily headline in the Fifty States today.  It is always identified with finding someone or some group (such as a foreign government or evil industrialists) to blame for the tampering, and it is always condemned in very strong terms as being corrosive and destructive of “democracy” and/or a republican form of government.

This is one of those things that virtually everyone sees as evil.  And apparently that everyone believes can be, somehow, someway, if enough money and effort is used, prevented or defeated.

I beg to differ.

Continue reading →

Posted in Nathan's Rants | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Bakers Dozen ™: What the Regressives are pushing

By Nathan Barton

Regressive is a more accurate term for those people who usually call themselves “Progressives” and include national, international, and transnational socialists: Nazis, Communists, and Tranzis. As we begin the 2020 election cycle far too soon (in my option) we see more and more incredibly stupid “solutions” being pushed.   Here is my thoughts on some of the major ones.

Continue reading →

Posted in Commentary on the News, Nathan's Rants | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mainstream media shows its bias – the history of slavery

By Nathan Barton

That dean of the mainstream media, as it continues to fail and decline, has a special series this year to commemorate the 400th anniversary the first known slaves to arrive in the English Colony of Virginia (at Jamestown).  This is called the “Dawn of American Slavery,” and the other media, the Tranzis, and too much of our fellow Americans seem to be lapping it up. They seem to be pushing the idea that the “founding” of American civilization began in 1619 with this traumatic event. Indeed, working with scholars, they have put a name (if not yet a face) to the very first slave, a black girl from what is now probably the Congo, traded to colonists in Virginia for food by a privateer. (The “Treasure” now condemned as the “first” slave ship.)

Of course, the very concept, as well as much of the information in their many articles, is dead wrong.

Continue reading →

Posted in Nathan's Rants | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Stupid government tricks – recycling

The following is taken from an article by Michael Munger, an economics professor.  It points out the stupidity of recycling as usually run by governments (and sometimes even by for-profit and non-profit groups).  My wife and I have long taught that much recycling – especially curbside recycling – is an expensive luxury.  This is especially true in the American West in 2019.

Is Recycling Useful, or Is It Garbage?

The problem with recycling is that people can’t decide which of two things is really going on.

Continue reading →

Posted in Nathan's Rants | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Oh, yes, the mainstream media

By Nathan Barton

Time and again, the media demonstrate that they cannot be trusted.

Consider three different stories. See how the mainstream media buries the story under the huge serving of propaganda they are dishing out to us, the public. And keep in mind, most of the public does not see this for what it is.

Continue reading →

Posted in Commentary on the News, Nathan's Rants | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Insanely, San Francisco debases the language – again

By Nathan Barton

What fun!  The Tranzi elites that have turned San Francisco into a Fourth-World city have struck again, this time at the English language.

According to the Daily Mail, their Board of Supervisors (nickname, Politburo, but I think that insults the Soviets) had determined that several common phrases must be abandoned in order to change views about those people who made mistakes and committed crimes.

Continue reading →

Posted in Commentary on the News, Nathan's Rants | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Comparing apples and oranges – education and more

By Nathan Barton

What should government provide?  How? Under what limits?

Over at FEE.org, Kerry McDonald has an excellent article comparing public libraries and public schools. It triggered more thoughts and some memories of political campaigns from years back.

She points out that although both libraries and schools are “public” and almost always government agencies, they are very different and have seriously different impacts on people, learning, and society.

Her article can be summed up simply in her own words:

The main difference between public libraries and public schools is the level of coercion and state power that public schooling wields.

Although government-run libraries and government-run schools are funded by tax money (stolen from taxpayers), libraries are NOT mandatory and do not really have the sort of monopoly that the GRTF schools do.  (Yes, she points out, you might not be able to check out a book or CD from a library in which district you do not reside, but you can still USE the library on-site.  As I often do while traveling.)

She then discusses what it would be like if indeed GRTF libraries were run like GRTF schools: mandatory attendance and much more.  I would add a few more things that we take for granted with GRTF schools: government-provided transportation to and from them, extracurricular activities added without number, government-furnished meals, counselors, and of course, additional fees on top of the supposedly “free education.”

I would also note that even though no state constitution (to my knowledge) requires that libraries be provided “free of tuition,” that I know of no public libraries in any state that require payment to allow entry.

The hypocrisy of government and politicians is obvious, once you make the comparison.

There are more “institutions” to which the insane organization and administration of GRTF schools can be compared, of course.  I did so during several political campaigns twenty and more years ago, by comparing “essentials” and what we expect people to have.

Just as all people need education, so too do all people need food.  Imagine if food were available ONLY through government-run, tax-funded grocery stores?  Where there would be only a single grocery store in a geographical district. (This was in South Dakota, where a majority of school districts are rural and have but a single K-12 school, unlike urban districts.) And the only source of food was that store, paid for (mostly) by taxes. And where it might even be illegal to go to another store than the one you are assigned to.

Of course, the simile could be greatly expanded from that, having to do with rationing of food, medical evaluation to determine what kind of food you could get, and much else.  But  didn’t have to go that far to make the point.

Many people consider it a “right” to be adequately fed. In fact, FDR coined that “right” by stating that “Freedom from hunger” was essential and should be provided by government, way back in the 1930s. (To justify the then-new welfare state he was creating.) So why doesn’t government take over the food distribution system the way it has taking over the education system?

We know that a big part of that answer is because that would NOT work.  Indeed, variations on that theme have been tried over the centuries.  We know that in many locations, the “company store” was the only source of food for the workers and their families.  It is today used as an example of corrupt business practices, because it gave power – nearly absolute power – by bosses over workers, and we know Lord Acton’s dictum.  Another example of such a system is the 19th Century and early 20th Century reservation system, in which government prohibited hunting and (while trying to force AmerInd to be subsistence farmers under insane conditions) and then provided commodities (beef, corn, wheat, sugar, etc.) on which the tribes were to subsist. The corruption of the Indian Ring and the maltreatment of people (basically imprisoned on the reservations) is well-known.

And we have seen similar failures and abuses throughout the world and history.  The starving of the Kulaks under Lenin and Stalin in Soviet Russia comes to mind.  The killing fields of Cambodia are yet another.  The closest thing to finding such a scheme which succeeded I can think of what that of Joseph ben Jacob in Egypt, where the Pharaoh’s government gathered the harvests of seven good years and then used it to feed the people in the seven bad years. (And even then, with what little we know, a lot of us question exactly how Pharaoh used it to create a tyranny in a once-free land.)

But it also important to know that there is NO MORE PROHIBITION in the US Constitution against governments taking over the distribution of food (that is, “nationalization” of food stores and distribution companies) than there is a prohibition against governments taking over education, or (a closer comparison) taking over some or all of the distribution and sale of beverage alcohol.  (The only part which might be considered such a prohibition is the Tenth Amendment.  However, this amendment is virtually completely ignored and would still allow states (or local) governments to take over food.)

Government has no more business providing education than it does providing food or liquor or any other consumer good.

(A related article that happened to go across my desktop today is also well worth reading – “How early is too early?” published by HSLDA, discussing appropriate ages for starting school and a lot of information on home- and private-schooling importance. That article contains numerous reasons that education should NOT be under government control or include compulsory attendance, age-based or not.)

Posted in Nathan's Rants | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sayings

Courtesy of a friend and correspondent, here are some great bits of political humor to share.  They all point to the problems with government, and remind us that no matter how bad government gets, we can still laugh at it. Forgive me if you’ve read them before.

Continue reading →

Posted in Nathan's Rants | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

Can America expand by adding states to the East?

By Nathan Barton

Having looked in North America and the Caribbean, let us now turn to the East, and therefore to the West (as in Western Europe and the British Isles).

Remember this discussion all started with Greenland, politically and sort-of socially part of Europe, although part of North America geographically.  Next to it is the tiny republic of Iceland, home to just 360,000 people and speaking Icelandic, a Scandinavian language.

They are part of Scandinavia, a region that includes at least four more nations: Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and Finland. (“Greater Scandinavia” includes Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, and according to some people, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and possibly North Dakota. Though Utah has a large part of its population of Scandinavian ancestry, the religion there negates that.) Mostly monarchies, language is the major barrier, although all four of those nations have majorities (I understand) who speak and read English. And both Denmark and Norway, I hear, still are so primitive that they use gold for money.

All of these are American allies, some very close and others de facto (Finland and Sweden for example, who were “neutral” during the Cold War). But the differences, their own stability, and other factors make them unlikely to want admission to the Union.

In the mainland of Europe, there are no really good candidates for admission, either.  Unless someone objects, I shall pass over these entirely.

What about the Mediterranean?  America has ties to the Med dating back to Columbus, of course. And the FedGov has been involved in the Med since the Barbary Wars, after the UK stopped protecting American shipping there.  Especially since the middle of WW2, the FedGov has constantly meddled in affairs there.  Obviously, Spain has close ties to the Fifty States’ Spanish-speakers.  Italy (or rather, Italians) have been major sources of influence and power in American politics for more than a century. (Nancy Pelosi being just one example.)  Israel (not really in Europe, I know) is close to the heart of many Americans (and the hideous satanic enemy for a lot, too).

But except for the occasional science fiction or alternate history story, it is unlikely that any of these areas might be admitted to the Union.  Any more than most of them have remained in the various empires, which at one time controlled all of the islands and many ports and enclaves on the mainland.  [But it is fun to consider a “State of Middle Earth” (the literal English translation of Mediterranean) as one of the United States, consisting of the Baleric Islands, Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Malta, and a united Cyprus. And maybe even the Greek islands including Crete?]

Seriously, it is very hard to see, even desperate, how mainland Europe could have any pieces apply for Statehood, and even less how Congress would accept that request. (Ditto for Africa.)

So that really leaves one place to consider. The British Isles.  This idea has come up many times in science fiction, as readers may know.  One or more pieces, if not the whole place.

I heard the issue discussed more than once during the Troubles (the Catholic-Protestant conflict in Northern Ireland).  Ideas ranged from one, two, or as many as five or six states, using the old Irish kingdoms and creating secular government to replace everything.  The ties of Irish from both modern polities to the Fifty States are very strong, and have been since the 1600s. (The Irish and Scots immigration and footprint on Western Virginia and the rest of the Appalachians played a major role during the War between the States and since, including the independence of West Virginia and the strong Unionist sentiment in Eastern Tennessee, Western North Carolina, and Eastern Kentucky.)  And there is no language barrier.

Brexit and a potential collapse of the Euro and the European Union would trigger some more discussion of admission to the American Union by one or both parts of Ireland. Eire (the South) has nearly five million and Northern Ireland almost two million people.  Highly educated, industrialized, and very much like the Fifty States in many ways, these two make some good sense as multiple States of the Union.

Britain itself is very much similar.  It would mean the end of the Monarchy, of course (unless the Windsors move to New Zealand).  But many in Scotland want just that.  And remember, England was briefly a republican Commonwealth (nearly 400 years ago, at that), which impacted North America and the creation of the FedGov itself.

Great Britain (c.1968)....51st State??? | Alternate ...

Again, the Fifty States have always had extremely close ties with England, Scotland, and Wales. England has 56 million, Wales 3 million, and Scotland nearly 6 million people. Admission of England as a single State would more than balance California (a point in Congress), but it is often suggested that England be at least four States, or about 14 million each: still making them some of the largest States (and still balancing California).

So if all of the British Isles were to be admitted to the Union, it could be as eight to ten States, which would be far more of an impact than admitting all of Canada or much of Mexico and the Caribbean. Such an action would be likely to lead to far more decentralization and reestablishment of a better-balanced federalism in the now Sixty States.  Many will argue that it is both a logical progression of the Angl0-American alliance of more than a century.  And some would argue that it is bringing history back to where it should be: the mistakes of a few dozen people in the 1700s finally corrected.

If the admission of ten British-Irish States were to be coupled with admitting 10 Canadian States and eight Australian-New Zealand States, it would indeed make the “United States” even more dominant, if it did not also lead to 1984’s “Oceania” at the same time.  A true federal confederation of the successors of the Anglo explosion of the 1600-1800s, and both old British Empires, as a republic, would be likely indeed to dominate Earth.

Posted in Nathan's Rants | Leave a comment

American expansion beyond North America to the west

By Nathan Barton

Modern technology means that the communications and access gap between the “home country” and “colonies” is largely gone.  In the days of sail – say, the British Empire before the American Revolution – it took one to two months to cross from England to the Atlantic Seaboard. Today, that is an 8-hour flight.

More to the point, when California was admitted to the Union in 1850, it was a 40-50 day trip from the Atlantic Seaboard to Los Angeles or San Francisco, via Panama.  It was a six-month journey by wagon train from Missouri.  In 1858, the first transcontinental stagecoach line took 25 days (St. Louis to San Francisco).  After 1869, the transcontinental railroad still required 6-10 from DC to California. Communications (Pony Express was faster, but still numbered in weeks) did not allow instant (or near-instant) communications between DC and California until 24 October 1861, by telegraph.

Yet California and Oregon (1859) were both admitted to the Union and functioned as States. Today, there is virtually no place on the planet that cannot be reached instantaneously by high-bandwidth communications, or by air travel within 30 hours or much less.

Continue reading →

Posted in Nathan's Rants | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment