Raid on Reason

Now did you read the news today?
They say the danger's gone away
But I can see the fires still alight
They're burning into the night
--Genesis

As these pages have frequently noted, leftists love to manipulate language in their favor. They employ positive substitute symbols and euphemisms to advance their agendas.

Case in point. The recent invasion of Donald Trump's Florida residence is no longer a 'raid.' Instead, it is now being deemed as an execution of a search warrant.

The raid, plainly, is on reason.

Crimson Tide

"He was wearing my Harvard tie. Can you believe it? My Harvard tie. Like, oh sure, he went to Harvard!"
--Louis Winthorpe III (Trading Places)

Harvard Crimson survey indicates 80% of Harvard faculty identify as liberal or very liberal. Check out the conservative sliver at less than 2 percent (with no 'very conservative' respondents).

Would they support hiring more conservatives to increase ideological diversity? 31% of the faculty said no. 56% supported stronger screening for former Trump officials seeking to join the faculty, while 30% were for banning anyone from that group outright.

More evidence that academic diversity has been firmly supplanted by academic perversity.

Weaponized Agencies

Trim life shadows flicker and fall
But you still can't turn away
Get up and run before you stall
Before the edges fray
--Ric Ocasek

Given that the executive branch now includes dozens of agencies with strong armed capability, it should come as no surprised that influential politicians will seek to 'weaponize' those agencies against political opponents. The FBI, CIA, and IRS are particularly attractive in this regard.

McCarthy, JFK, Tea Party, et al.

In the recent years, there has been no better example of the weaponization of federal agencies than the concerted operations to take down Donald Trump. First as a candidate, then as sitting president, and now as a former president with future candidate potential. The FBI, CIA, DOJ, and even the military has been involved.

Yesterday's actions will be difficult for even many partisans to brush off as federal agents raided Trump's home in Florida.

Actions over the past few years have escalated to the stuff of authoritarian police states. The current administration is brazenly employing federal agencies to punish political opposition.

What authoritarians never seem capable of understanding is the extent to which their aggression strengthens the resolve of the liberty-minded.

Hiroshima Myth

"The principle of law in every civilized society has this in common: Any person who sways another to commit murder, any person who furnishes the lethal weapon for the purpose of the crime, any person who is an accessory to the crime...is guilty."
--Judge Dan Heywood (Judgment at Nuremburg)

On August 6, 1945, a United States B-29 dropped the world's first atomic bomb in Hiroshima, Japan. Three days later another A-bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki. Japan surrendered later that month to end WWII.

An estimated 120,000 perished in the two blasts with hundreds of thousands subsequently maimed or killed from radiation exposure. The lion's share of casualties were civilians--mostly women and children.

The popular myth trotted out to justify this carnage is that, by bombing the Japanese mainland and inflicting death and destruction to a degree that forced a surrender, the US subsequently avoided more than a million additional military casualties that would have resulted from the ongoing conventional war campaign--including an inevitable invasion operation of Japan.

As discussed in this article, this amounts to little more than the rationalization of atrocity.

The fact is that Japanese officials signaled their willingness to conditionally surrender earlier in 1945. Their condition was that Japanese emperor Hirohito would remain in power and not be subjected to criminal investigations after the war. The idea was to preserve as much Japanese culture as possible, and to provide continuity to facilitate economic and social functioning in post-war Japan.

Sadly, President Truman and his lackeys were unwilling to accept anything other than unconditional surrender--quite ironic since after the war Hirohito was indeed permitted to remain as emperor until his death in 1989. 

Why, then, were the bombs dropped?

The answer is that Truman and his staff, particularly his confidante and future secretary of state James Byrnes, had their eyes on Russia. Using atomic weapons would demonstrate US military strength to Russia and keep Stalin & Co at bay as the superpowers entered a 'cold war.' A secondary reason was that Congress could be assured that its secret appropriation for the Manhattan Project was bearing fruit that created near and longer term benefits.

Following the bombings, however, many officials, including Commander of the Third Fleet Admiral Bill Halsey, Fleet Commander Chester Nimitz, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff William Leahy, and atomic theorist Albert Einstein, condemned the action. 

This is when the propaganda machinery got into gear. Editorials and articles began to hit the pages of newspapers and magazines about the military necessity of the bombings. The myth has been continually reinforced, usually around this time of year, by political leaders and a complicit media. 

Perhaps in a brief moment of conscience, Henry Stimson, who was secretary of war at the time and chief propagator of the subsequent Hiroshima myth, wrote in his memoirs, 

"Unfortunately, I have lived long enough to know that history is not what actually happened but what is recorded as such." 

Indeed, Mr Stimson. My sense is that you and many of your contemporaries will face, quite literally, the trial of your lives on Judgment Day.

Premie Retirees

"I'm gone. Don't try to find me. You won't. I'm on strike."
--Ellis Wyatt (Atlas Shrugged: Part 1)

This article suggests that the pandemic taught many people, especially young ones, that work doesn't pay. It is better to stay home and goof off rather than to toil one's life away.

Makes sense when the government was sending stimulus checks that paid people to stay home--given axiomatic aversion to labor that steers human behavior. However, it doesn't explain how those young non-workers will continue to not work once the stimmy checks dry up.

That said, it is entirely possible that an older, yet still capable cohort has indeed left the workforce for good as part of the Great Resignation. Many people approaching retirement age became disgusted with restrictive pandemic work policies, such as masking and mandatory vaccinations and hit the silk rather than deal with unpleasantries that conflicted with their principles.

Unlike younger workers, this cohort has a substantial nest egg that can be used to fund unexpected early retirement. Because they are still productive, premature retirees could always step back into the workforce if they change their minds, or if their budgetary situation changes.

Given the still-oppressive regulatory overhang governing many workplaces, however, many of these premies may be gone for good a la John Galt.

When the Going Gets Tough

I got something to tell you
I got something to say
--Billy Ocean

The two key charts, updated again. Fed funds rate, recessions/crises, and SPX.

QE, SPX, and related events.

When the going gets tough, what does the Fed do?

Blatant Lying

"Richard, it profits a man to give is soul for the whole world...but for Wales?"
--Sir Thomas More (A Man for All Seasons)

An administration bureaucrat looks straight into the camera and claims that it is "factually not true" that gasoline prices were rising prior to the Ukraine conflict.

These people will use any means when attempting to manage narratives. Blatant lying included.

Not Adding Up

There's something happening here
What it is ain't exactly clear
--Buffalo Springfield

Something doesn't add up about Nancy Pelosi's provocative trip to Taiwan. Leftists have long expressed open admiration of the Chinese communist system. They have been silent on blatant human rights violations of the CCP for years, including the use of concentration camps for dissenters.

More recently, leftists sat idly by during the pro-freedom and independence protests in Hong Kong in the summer of 2019--protests that were ultimately put down by the Chinese government.

Now we are to believe that leftists like Pelosi are suddenly on the side of people seeking self-determination? Not only does this fly in the face of their affection for the Chinese model, but any reasoning mind realizes full well that leftists believe in authoritarian rule and collectivism, not self-determination. 

As the Chinese military incircles the island to conduct live fire 'military exercises,' one has to wonder what is really going on here.

Inflation Reduction Act

I bought a novel, some perfume
A fortune all for you
But it's not my conscience
That hates to be untrue
I asked of my reflection,
"Tell me what is there to do?"
--Squeeze

As we've discussed, leftists are rarely honest with their rhetoric. They label things largely contrary of their actual effects.

Cast in point: the proposed Inflation Reduction Act. 

As Ron Paul discusses, the bill does the opposite. It increases government spending by hundreds of billions of dollars. It takes resources out of the hands of private citizens and puts them into the hands of bureaucrats.

Not only does this increase the risk of capital misallocation, but it must be funded. To the extent that citizens are taxed, it reduces economic resources available to people during an era of high price inflation and slowing economic activity.

It is a universal truth that slow economic activity motivates easier central bank monetary policy (read: inflation).

To the extent that taxes won't cover the spending, then those funds must either be a) borrowed, which taxes future incomes, or b) printed (the reason why inflation is called the 'invisible tax').

There is little doubt that the Inflation Reduction Act will ultimately result in more inflation, not less.

In the Dogma House

Carmen Sternwood: What's your name?
Philip Marlowe: Doghouse Reilley
Carmen Sternwood: That's a funny kind of name.
Philip Marlowe: You think so?
--The Big Sleep

Dogma is belief accepted by a group without question or debate. It stands to reason that the higher the preference for collectivism among members of a group, the more likely that dogma will reside within the group.

How to counter such groupthink? One way is to avoid affiliations. As Jefferson understood, belonging to groups tends to cloud judgment.

Outside viewpoints are also useful as they bring fresh perspective. Of course, outsiders are typically unwelcome in collectivist circles as they threat group cohesion.

Finally, there is reason. Applying logic and scientific thinking toward dogmatic principles commonly lays groupthink to waste.

Should it be surprising, then, that leftists increasingly claim reason and critical thinking to be racist and inflammatory?

They need to quell the threat to group cohesion somehow.