Bruce Charlton's Notions: Negative notice of Dark Star Rising: magick and power in the age of Trump (2018) by Gary Lachman

First I will reproduce a comment I published on Steve Sailer's blog a couple of days ago:

I read Dark Star Rising a couple of months ago, in a review copy; but have been holding-off publishing my thoughts until the official publication date. 

Gary Lachman is a very solid and well known writer on ‘occult’ topics – I have read quite a few of his previous books (e.g. on Rudolf Steiner, Swedenborg, and historical surveys of sixties spiritual counter culture, Western esotericism etc). All are very good. 

He also wrote a really *excellent* biography of Colin Wilson called Beyond the Robot (indeed, I first came across Lachman around 2000 when we both used to contribute to a small, Colin Wilson oriented magazine). 

Having said all that positive stuff, and to my surprise and disappointment – I found Dark Star Rising a poor book; far below the high standards I have come to expect from GL – lacking both (minimal) objectivity; and with a meagre, distorted, and fundamentally mistaken factual basis. Histrionic and sloppy. I’ll say more specifically, when I review it properly on my blog. 

But I would say: please don’t be put off reading Lachman’s earlier work by this book; which is probably, unfortunately, going to get a fair bit of publicity… 


I now find that I have not the heart to review Dark Star Rising in any kind of detail, as I intended. It's not just that it is a very poorly researched book - in which all the evidence about the 'Alt-Right' comes from its mass media/ party political enemies (amazingly; nothing at all about the roots in Mencius Moldbug nor the current domination by Vox Day and his gang, to mention two egregious omissions).

This means that the straw man which Lachman is attacking is essentially just another variant of his own secular progressivism.

(Trump himself is, of course, a progressive and a sexual revolutionary - a child of materialism, utilitarianism, economism, big business, public relations and propaganda; a figure of the mass media, advertising, social media... He also has virtues (including courage and independence of mind); and Trump's enemies are far worse than Trump himself; and Trump is almost always attacked most viciously for what he does right, not for his flaws. But Trump Just-Is A Man of the Left, by world-historical standards. Obviously!)

Lachman leaves out genuine religious reactionaries - or rather, explains-them-away; I think because he personally does not believe that people could genuinely and primarily be motivated by a religion (especially not Christianity) but that it is a front for reactionary (i.e. racist, sexist, 'phobic' politics). In his comments on Russia, it is clear that he regards the massive Christian revival there as a complete fake; a cover-up.


It's not just that all kind of prejudicial assumptions are built-into this book's argument - unexamined, undefined, untested - especially about key concepts like 'extreme right wing', 'white supremacists' (that mythical power bloc, consisting mainly of false flag operatives, subversive infiltrators and agents provocateurs) and the like: the slur words of the billionaire/ big-finance-subsidised Social Justice Warrior activists in the mass/ social media; in pressure-groups, NGOs and 'charities; and dominating all powerful or well-funded institutions...

It seems just a waste of time to be specific in analysis and critique, because the book is written from that point of view of moral inversion which is mainstream among the Global Elites - so it is clear that Gary Lachman has been corrupted.

However valuable I found Gary Lachman's earlier work; it is clear that he now has crossed the line, abandoned all his earlier standards of scholarship and fairness; and joined the forces of darkness. He has been confronted by a moment-of-truth, he has made a decision, he has taken a crucial step; and the process of corruption has apparently been very rapid.


But there is a lesson to be learned here. Lachman's previous stance was broadly 'agnostic' - at least, that was the perspective from which his books were written. He seems like a decent kind of man, worked hard, wrote clearly, did useful stuff...

Yet it was always clear that Lachman shared the mainstream 'anything but Christianity' kind of reflexive leftist/ progressive/ pro-sexual revolution perspective... which is all-but universal among those active in the perennialist, spiritual, esoteric, neo-pagan, self-help, personal development world.

Here and now, this agnostic stance of suspended judgement is non-viable: things have come to a point; because of the pervasive domination of New Left/ Political Correctness in all major social institutions everyone is incrementally being brought to a fork in the path, a decision yes or no.

I see this all around me. We live in a world of spiritual warfare. It cannot be hidden from, choice cannot be evaded. We cannot 'keep our heads down' because everyone is located and they must stand-up and raise their hands (and voices) to endorse and promote the current, evolving Leftist totalitarian narrative in all its respects - or else...


For the past decade and more, I have been seeing people whom I have known (sometimes for decades), very suddenly and swiftly (so fast I only see the after-effects) become fundamentally-corrupt - becoming allies, servants and advocates of evil.

The number who make the right choice is very small indeed - and I am talking about a really tiny percentage.

That's how it is.


These times are times of clarity - clarity so long as we don't imagine there is anything like a quantitatively-equal division between those who choose good and evil.

So long as we are prepared to see what ought-to-be obvious - that nearly-everybody is choosing evil. It may well be that every-single-person in your social group has chosen evil: it is that common, it is that kind of proportion.

Then, if we have been noticing; we will be dismayed and disappointed but we will not be at all surprised - when friends and relations, as well as bosses, colleagues and public figures - when they nearly-all get it wrong.

Given what they believe and disbelieve; given what they prioritise in Life: what did we expect?

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2018/05/negative-notice-of-dark-star-rising.html

Vox Popoli: Dawkins Syndrome - (Is atheism a mild form of autism?)

Apparently my hypothesis that atheism is a mild form of autism was correct, but didn't go anywhere nearly far enough. Scientists are determining that atheists are mutants who are literally unfit in a variety of ways.

Until the Industrial Revolution, we were under harsh conditions of Darwinian Selection, meaning that about 40% of children died before they reached adulthood. These children would have been those who had mutant genes, leading to poor immune systems and death from childhood diseases. But they would also have had mutant genes affecting the mind. This is because the brain, home to 84% of the genome, is extraordinarily sensitive to mutation, so mental and physical mutation robustly correlate. If these children had grown up, they might have had autism, schizophrenia, depression… but they had poor immune systems, so they never had the chance.

Under these conditions, prevalent until the nineteenth century, we were individually selected for but we were also “group selected” for. Ethnic groups are simply a genetic extended family and some groups fared better against the environment and enemy groups than others did, due to the kind of partly genetic psychological adaptations they developed.

Among these, the authors argue, was a very specific kind of religiosity which developed in all complex societies: the collective worship of gods concerned with morality. Belief in these kinds of gods was selected for, they maintain, because once we developed cities we had to deal with strangers—people who weren’t part of our extended family. By conceiving of a god who demanded moral behaviour towards other believers, people were compelled to cooperate with these strangers, meaning that large, highly cooperative groups could develop.

Computer models have proven that the more internally cooperative group—which is also hostile to infidel outsiders—wins the battle of group selection [The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation by Max Hartshorn, June 2013]. This very specific kind of religiousness was selected for and, indeed, it correlates with positive and negative ethnocentrism even today.

The authors demonstrate that this kind of religiousness has clearly been selected for in itself. It is about 40% genetic according to twin studies, it is associated with strongly elevated fertility, it can be traced to activity in specific regions of the brain, and it is associated with elevated health: all the key markers that something has been selected for.

And it is from here that the authors make the leap that has made SJW blood boil. Drawing on research by Michael Woodley of Menie and his team (see here and here)they argue that conditions of Darwinian selection have now massively weakened, leading to a huge rise in people with damaging mutations. This is evidenced in increasing rates of autism, schizophrenia, homosexuality, sex-dysmorphia, left-handedness, asymmetrical bodies and much else. These are all indicators of mutant genes.

Woodley suggests that weakened Darwinian selection would have led to the spread of “spiteful mutations” of the mind, which would help to destroy the increasingly physically and mentally sick group, even influencing the non-carriers to behave against their genetic interests, as carriers would help undermine the structures through which members learnt adaptive behaviour.

This is exactly what happened in the infamous Mouse Utopia experiment in the late 1960s, where a colony of mice was placed in conditions of zero Darwinian selection and eventually died out. [Death squared: The explosive growth and demise of a mouse population. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, January 1973(PDF)].

So Dutton and his team argue that, this being the case, deviation from this very specific form of religiousness—the collective worship of moral gods in which almost everyone engaged in 1800—should be associated with these markers of mutation. In other words, both atheists and those interested in spirituality with no moral gods (such as the paranormal) should be disproportionately mutants.

And this is precisely what they show. Poor physical and mental health are both significantly genetic and imply high mutational load. Dutton and his team demonstrate that this specific form of religiousness, when controlling for key factors such as SES, predicts much better objective mental and physical health, recovery from illness, and longevity than atheism.

It’s generally believed that religiousness makes you healthier because it makes you worry less and elevates your mood, but they turn this view on its head, showing that religious worshippers are more likely to carry gene forms associated with being low in anxiety. Schizophrenia, they show, is associated with extreme and anti-social religiosity, rather than collective worship. Similarly, belief in the paranormal is predicted by schizophrenia, and this is a marker of genetic mutation.

Next, they test autism, another widely accepted marker of mutation, as evidenced by the fact that it’s more common among the children of older men, whose fathers are prone to mutant sperm. Autism predicts atheism.

The good news is that once times get difficult again, atheism will again recede in both quantities and virulence. The bad news is that we are going to have to try to treat people born with what I suggest we call "Dawkins Syndrome" with a little more sympathy, since they probably can't help their lack of belief or behavior much more than those born with Downe's Syndrome.

How fortunate that those born with Dawkins Syndrome are so highly rational and inclined to put perfect faith in science. Surely they will accept these new scientific discoveries about their condition with grace and aplomb.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/05/dawkins-syndrome.html

oftwominds-Charles Hugh Smith: America 2018: Dicier by the Day

Scrape all this putrid excrescence off and we're left with a non-fantasy reality: everything is getting dicier by the day.

If we look beneath the cheery chatter of the financial media and the tiresomely repetitive Russian collusion narrative (that's unraveling as the Ministry of Propaganda's machinations are exposed), we find that America in 2018 is dicier by the day.

The more you know about the actual functioning of critical subsystems, the keener your awareness of the system's fragility, reliance on artifice and an unceasing flow of "free money." Keynesian economics boils down to a very simple premise: a slowing or stagnant economy can be goosed by distributing plenty of "free money" which can be freely blown on either speculation or goods and services.

The "free money" (either created out of thin air or borrowed into existence at rates of interest so low that they're less than zero when adjusted for inflation) dumped into speculation gooses assets higher, generating the "wealth effect" beloved by Keynesians, and the "free money" dumped into goods and services gooses consumption, tax revenues, hiring and so on.

The catch is "free money" is never actually free. Creating trillions out of thin air reduces the purchasing power of all existing currency, and pretty soon you're following Venezuela into "our money has lost all its value" territory.

Borrow trillions into existence and at some point even ludicrously low rates of interest start piling up serious sums of interest due, and the system eventually collapses under the weight of defaults and interest payments that stripmine the economy's productive capacity.

Every subsystem in America has compensated for structural stagnation and increasing friction by reducing redundancy and buffers. Have you noticed how many airline flights are now delayed by mechanical issues? Nobody keeps spare parts in stock, and servicing is now concentrated in a handful of hubs; there's no spare aircraft or flight crews available. All the buffers and redundancy have been stripped out to lower costs and maintain profits, lest the management team be fired for missing a quarterly earning target.

If you think America's healthcare system is functioning wonderfully, you need to hear some unvarnished, frank reports from nurses and doctors who are speaking off the record. Healthcare is increasingly fragile as physicians and nurses bail out by retiring early. A destructive feedback is taking hold in rural America and other under-served "markets": chronic shortages of physicians and nurses overload the overworked frontline care providers, burning them out as the workloads becomes impossible to manage without leaving widening cracks in care and infrastructure.

As for education: virtually every school district is screaming for more money while its budget is increasingly devoted to soaring pension contributions. The same can be said for many public agencies and institutions. The unwelcome reality is there isn't enough money in the Universe to fund all the pension obligations and increase funding to meet the demands for more of everything-- unless you just create vast sums out of thin air, in which case you follow Venezuela down the monetary black hole to the point that 1 million units of central bank/government-issued "money" equals one loaf of bread.

Public services are stripmined to meet pension obligations, and this zero-sum reality will only become more apparent as the excesses of speculation, debt, malinvestment and asset bubbles decay into the inevitable business-cycle recession--a recession that will be made worse by the issuance of more "free money," as the increasing reliance on the marginal speculator and borrower will hasten the avalanche of defaults and malinvestments that will bring down the entire house of cards.

As the tent cities of the homeless proliferate, cities and counties are finding their revenues are devoted to pension obligations, leaving less and less to education, filling potholes, addressing the homeless crisis, the opioid crisis, etc. When the "everything bubble" pops and assets crater, the impossibility of fulfilling promises made in "good times" will be apparent to all but those demanding "their fair share."

About that "cheap abundant energy" provided by fracking: it's only cheap if we overlook the $250 billion in losses racked up by the sector, and it's only abundant if we ignore the rapid depletion of the majority of wells.

We're supposed to take Facebook's ease in brushing off its blatant exploitation of users' data as proof all is well in social-media-land, but the reality is sobering: America's devotion to Facebook is evidence of the populace's desperate yearning for a connection, any connection, no matter how thin or artificial, to a sense of community in a society stripped of authentic community by the dominance of maximizing profit (Facebook, Amazon and Google's raison d'etre) and centralized power.

This chart of total debt reveals the system's profound fragility--a fragility the Powers That Be are trying to mask with a tsunami of artifice: the system is now so dependent on the heroin hit of "free money" that even the slightest pause in credit growth will collapse the entire global financial system. This is why central banks have created trillions out of thin air--TINA: there is no alternative:

Between the ceaseless Ministry of Propaganda hysteria, the childish fantasy of super-hero films (we're gonna be saved by somebody, no effort on our own behalf required) and the disgorging of zero-credibility economic statistics, the distractions are 24/7. But scrape all this putrid excrescence off and we're left with a non-fantasy reality: everything is getting dicier by the day.

http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2018/05/america-2018-dicier-by-day.html

Mentoring Moment – May 27, 2018 - CAP – Study 10 – Institutions – Family – Welfare

If you have diligently followed the common thread of these studies, it should now have become obvious that most of the problems that surround us in this world, which seem to have no answers, actually do have answers – at least from the bible.

The question then becomes: How long will we wait before we get serious and actually take matters in hand to deal with them?

And what about the church - where is its responsibility? How often are these issues addressed, other than simply complaining about the state of the family, nation and the world - and waiting for Jesus to do the job for us, when He clearly instructed us to get it done? Matt. 28:18-20

This study addresses the subject of welfare.

·         The family is designated by God as the chief agency of human welfare.

·         The fundamental principle of welfare is that charity should be personal.

·         Rights of the eldest son (or most responsible child) are explained.

·         The modern state has replaced the ‘eldest son’.

·         The modern state has also become the heir of the family estate.

·         The church is responsible to support its widows whose families have abandoned them.

The over-arching question then becomes: Does God’s way work – in our own lives – in our families – in our communities – in our country – in our entire world? Do we believe Him enough to at least test it out?

“Prove all things; hold on to that which is good!”-1 Thess. 5:21

(You can backtrack this series thread from here.)

(The following is from Gary North’s book “Unconditional Surrender”.)

Welfare

The family is designated by God as the chief agency of human welfare. It is the agency that is most effective in solving the problems of poverty, sickness, and crisis. It is the only agency which knows its limitations and strengths. The head of every household count's the costs of every project undertaken by the family. No other human agency links mutual self-interest, mutual understanding, mutual obligations, and mutual support in the way that a family can. Members are close. They know each other's weaknesses and strengths. The family is also an extended institution, with bloodline contacts that can spread out widely. It can call upon related families for help in a crisis.

It is a fundamental principle of charity that charity be personal whenever possible. The Samaritan in Jesus' parable of the good Samaritan came across a helpless, injured man. He helped him. He could see how badly the man was hurt. He could see that he was not being tricked. He had the resources necessary for helping the man. He was close to a place where the man could be cared for. He hired the caretaker personally, which meant that he could hold that man responsible for the care of the injured man, since he was paying him to do the work (Luke 10:33-35). This is how Jesus defined the term "neighbor." It means someone who is in a position to help and who does so, based on accurate information concerning the plight of the injured or helpless.

The person most likely to be able to help a poor man is a slightly less poor man. The slightly less poor man is closer to the poor man (geographically and socially), he can recognize true need better than a distant man, and he can more accurately assess the short-term solutions to the poor man's problems. This means that charity from the rich should be filtered down through institutions that are close to the poor. The church is one such institution. Other private charities may also qualify. But well-paid, bureaucratic agents of the State, with its compulsory programs financed by taxes, will not be able to help the poor except at the expense of everyone's independence. The rich will pay, the poor will receive a fraction of the payments, and the bureaucrats will multiply. The relationship is invariably permanent, until the welfare State, that pseudo-family, goes bankrupt and is overthrown internally or defeated by external nations.

The family cares for children. It finances their educations. It cares for sick relatives. It provides work for the partially employable members in its midst. It supervises with feeling, not with forms in triplicate. It provides insurance, but not a lifetime of compulsory Social Security tax payments that are finally wiped out by the mass inflation necessary at the end of such programs in order to finance them. It provides aid, but not to everyone, not to blocs of special-interest voters.

The eldest son is entitled to a double portion of the family's estate (Deuteronomy 21:17). This means that if a man has four children who are legally responsible for him, then he must divide the estate into five equal shares, with the eldest son receiving two-fifths. Why? Because it is the eldest son who has the primary responsibility for caring for aged parents. The child who is willing to bear this responsibility is treated as the eldest son, such as Isaac's position of favor before Abraham, not Ishmael, the firstborn, or Jacob's position before Isaac because of God's choosing of Jacob over Esau, the elder twin. There is a mutuality of service and blessings. Costs and benefits are more closely linked. Family disputes among the children are minimized.

The State, in modern times, has become the "eldest son." Estate taxes in some nations will take virtually all of very wealthy estates. Families are forced to sell off lands and family heirlooms in order to pay the estate taxes. The State has asserted its position as the pseudo-family, and now it demands payment for its services. Those who voted for the creation of the caretaker State in the twentieth century should have known what would happen. The State becomes the heir of family capital. The true families are progressively bankrupted, yet the State, as an inefficient, tyrannical, life-long pseudo-parent, is also steadily bankrupted, for the State is not creative; it is parasitic. It needs new wealth to confiscate, yet its steady destruction of family capital withers up the sources of new taxes.

The church is required to take in widows who have reached the age of 60, but whose families refuse to support them (I Timothy 5:3-13). Nephews are considered responsible by the church authorities in such cases. It is a matter of excommunication for any family member to refuse such support to a de serving widow who meets the criteria specified in this passage. "But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel" (I Timothy 5:8).

It should be obvious that the family, and not the civil government, is the central agency in the battle against poverty. The incentive to increase the assets of the family leads directly to increased production. The incentive to maintain the reputation of the family by providing charity for indigent members is also present in societies governed by biblical principles. Because the family is the agency of social welfare, the civil government can remain small, limiting itself to protecting property, providing for national defense, enforcing God's civil law, and defending the public peace. The family, as the chief agency of government, reduces the need for civil government.

Reminder to Mentors about Reading Comments after Articles - May 27, 2018 - from Crush

When you read a posted article here, be sure to check out the comments from readers - they reveal the thinking that is out there for all of us to learn from or debate. As you gain from the insights provided by some very good writers, your own thoughts might be appreciated by some others - and sometimes aren't!:)

Judging Trump | The Z Blog

From time to time recently, people have asked me if I have second thoughts about this post from a few months ago. I was a tiny bit more critical than normal, but in my defense, I have no sense of humor on the gun issue. There are certain issues that draw a bright line between the chosen and the damned. Guns are one of them. There’s no “sort of getting it right” or “only being a bit wrong.” You either get it or you don’t and I still don’t think Trump gets it, but he has shut up about it. He went to the NRA convention, so I’ll give him a pass.

That said, I’m still waiting for Trump to deliver on the stuff that is important to me. Despite the bold talk on immigration, he has so far been an economic populist, rather than a national populist. His best work has been on trade, where he has gotten tough on China and re-opened the NAFTA deal. He’s also dismantled the climate change apparatus inside the Department of Energy and cut a ton of regulations. These are all good things and in another age, I’d probably be over the moon. But, it is not another age. It is now.

Despite making lots of noise on the issue, nothing much has changed on the immigration front. The wall is no closer to reality than it was two years ago. The number of guest worker visas has increased, rather than decreased. The DACA issue is still out there, as Trump now waits on the states to solve the problem for him. He put a complete dunce in as secretary of DHS, making things worst on that front, rather than better. Worse yet, that perfidious weasel Paul Ryan is quietly trying to sneak an amnesty through the House.

In fairness, the immigration issue is not an easy puzzle to solve. No reasonable person should have expected sweeping reform in the first two years of his presidency. The fact is, a third of the GOP is bought and paid for by the open borders lobbies. Another third are so utterly clueless on the issue, they don’t know where to start, even if they wanted to push the issue. Still, Trump has been outfoxed and outworked by his opponents on immigration. He seems to like talking about immigration more than doing anything about it.

All that said, he has a lot of time to make things right and he has shown an extremly rare ability to address his own errors. The gun issue is a good example. He was making all of the usual mistakes on guns, then he wised up and reversed course. Most politicians are the opposite of a fine wine. They get worse with age. Because he is not an ideologue, Trump learns from his mistakes and adjusts. Maybe on the immigration front we see the same sort of growth we saw on guns. There’s still time to get a lot done.

The bigger issue though, the thing now looming over his entire presidency, is the wide ranging conspiracy engineered by senior elements of the intelligence community. A few months ago it looked like a handful of radicalized mid-level bureaucrats. What’s becoming clear is this was a conspiracy hatched by the men at the top of the intelligence community, with help from the White House, to not only help Hillary Clinton, but engineer a coup after the election to get rid of Trump. This reality has to color any assessment of Trump.

Think about the stones it takes to face off against the intel community. They literally know all of your secrets. In the case of Trump, they have the secrets of his friends, family and business associates. Even if they can’t ruin him, they can ruin people he knows. It was 18 months ago that Chuck Schumer warned Trump about doing this. When Schumer said, “Intel officials ‘have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you'” he was not being flippant or rhetorical. We now know the intel community has been at this for a while.

It’s not just the fact that the intel community has the capacity to spy on everyone and appears to be spying on everyone. It’s that these are vicious, craven people lacking a moral compass. It’s ironic that James Comey was fond of accusing his people of lacking a moral compass, when it is now clear the guy is a sociopath incapable of knowing right from wrong. Clapper and Brennan have no scruples whatsoever. There’s also the fact that on the CIA side, they still have guys who kill people on behalf of the American deep state.

Now, we can’t know how much Trump knows, or how much much he knew back in the campaign about the spying. It is entirely possible that honest people had told him what was happening long ago. We do know Mike Rogers went to Trump Tower after the election and warned Trump about this operation. Once in office, Trump would have been briefed on a lot of things related to this. Even if he thought it was just a handful of crackpots in the FBI, it took mighty big stones to take the issue head on.

One of the funny things about these times is they are entirely unexpected. Back when Trump came down the escalator and started talking like Pat Buchanan, I recall thinking, “I can’t imagine a scenario where I vote for him, but I never imagined anyone saying these things again either.” Trump is turning out to be the most consequential president in our lifetime, which is not something any sane person could have imagined two years ago. I think we have to withhold judgement on him until these great events of this age unfold.

http://thezman.com/wordpress/?p=13940

bionic mosquito: Making America Irrelevant Again

It is easy to say that Trump is failing on the one thing I thought made him a better candidate than most others two years ago and that is on the issue of war and empire.  Well, that and he was a great stick in the eye of those who work hard to control the narrative.

I must admit, in many ways he is turning out even better than I had hoped…well, if we all (literally) survive his time in office.

Internationally, can you think of a time in your lifetime when the United States government so consistently and widely – and openly – made itself a pariah?  For the Europeans, it is the Iran nuclear deal; for East Asians, it is North Korea; for Arabs not associated with the Kingdom…well, that’s pretty much the same as always, but Nikki Haley has a way of putting an exclamation point on it, doesn’t she.

On trade it’s the TPP, NAFTA, China dumping, etc.  Every action drives allies away and drives all players to find ways to circumvent or avoid US markets, the US Dollar, US technology, etc.

Nationally…the election itself made clear the divide in America – the red counties vs. the blue counties; the deplorables vs. the “civilized.”  We have the NFL and the flag – America, love it or leave it has come back in vogue.  All thanks to the Donald.

Trump is doing more to accelerate the decentralization of the empire and the decentralization of the country than any other president in my lifetime.  As libertarianism in theory is decentralization in practice – and as I suggested a year ago – I think Trump is the most libertarian president of my lifetime.

Does this end with the end of his presidency?  I don’t think so.  These trends are all inevitable; we can only thank God that the right man showed up at the right time to accelerate the process.  Whoever comes next won’t matter (although if the deplorables don’t get what they want this time, the civilized might look longingly back on the days of Trump), because the direction is inevitable and won’t be reversed.

Speaking of the end of his presidency, it seems to me that Trump is setting up for a smashing victory in the upcoming mid-terms.  I have suspected for quite some time that he (along with a subset of republicans in congress and some in the administration) are lining up their investigative actions and news leaks to come exploding full-tilt on the scene about four weeks before the November elections.

We know the news already and that it will be bad for the democrats.  Trump is merely orchestrating the timing.  Talk about tearing the country apart, I think we ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

Like I said, the most libertarian president of my lifetime.

http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2018/05/making-america-irrelevant-again.html