Category archive

Activism

ARE POLITICIANS OUR ‘PROTECTORS’ OR ULTIMATE FREE RIDERS? TIME TO VOTE NOTA AND GET RID OF ALL BLOODSUCKING POLITICAL PARASITES?

Published on in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Poor Pratt's Almanack
TIME TO VOTE NOTA AND GET RID OF ALL BLOODSUCKING POLITICAL PARASITES?


Think about the percentage of GDP wasted to support parasitic political free riders of all stripes whose income at least partially depends directly or indirectly on the corrupt cronyism-riddled political process that produces absolutely nothing other than wars, economic dependency, elite authority versus free market producer societies, and a multitude of degrees of misery and slavery.

Yep, get elected, be part of the political process, delude yourself with artificial power peer approval, and reap the perks that go with power like hot dogs and beer go with baseball.

Do you think that is not a very thoughtful approach to achieving freedom? and freedom from what? Well, maybe freedom from the need to embrace the rigors of the free market while diluting freedoms for the rest of us?

Now, who is fooling whom? The political process and politicians are explicitly the problem, not the solution, which will come first and foremost from the free market.

Boy Did We Sell The Voters a Bill of Freedom Goods!

The sole redeeming values of the political process are education, planting seeds of freedom, and possibly a mop-up role to dismantle Big Brother, but only after the free market does the heavy lifting. Look to the free market for freedom from political parasites.

Is the LP well on its way to becoming the lesser of three evils third leg of a terrible triopoly? If so, what should we change to get the LP pointed back to the vision and mission of the healthy, growing, and maturing broader Libertarian movement: Freedom, Nothing More, Nothing Less, For All People IN OUR LIFETIMES?

Now, the burning question is: How will Libertarian politicians respond? Stay tuned and take notes before you decide whether to vote NOTA as a way to stop enabling cronyism-prone corruptible politicians.

Giddy About Freedom As We Do About Politics?

Thoughts?

D. Pratt Tseramed, July 6, 2020
David.Demarest@R2FF.org, 402-493-0873

You might be interested in

LIBERTARIAN PARTY FREE MARKET CAUCUS VISION, MISSION, STRATEGY, AND INITIAL AGENDA

Published on in Activism/Free Market/Information/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
LIBERTARIAN PARTY FREE MARKET CAUCUS VISION, MISSION, STRATEGY, AND INITIAL AGENDA

Link to the Facebook group ‘LP Free Market Caucus’ (LPFMC):

https://www.facebook.com/groups/LPFreeMarketCaucus/

Link to the accompanying Facebook group ‘Free Market Action – Individual Rights’:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/FreeMarketAction/

Ready to rock and roll in the free market? Welcome! Here’s the plan. Our group will be laser-focused on the three following types of free market projects:

1. Build a better product or service that will provide real benefits to people and improve their lives today or in the future

2. Provide a free market networking service to connect people with projects

3. Collaborate on free market advocacy, education, and outreach projects

Before we spell out the immediate caucus agenda, here are a few comments on our vision, mission, and strategy:

We are not about building an empire. We recognize that our efforts will have political impact, hence our connection to the Libertarian Party as a caucus. Our goal is to support the free market by fostering projects regardless of whether the projects are directly or indirectly associated with our caucus or spun off and totally independent.

We are all self-funded individual volunteers focused on projects that may have political impact, but we leave the politics to those so inclined. Since all projects will be self-funded internally and/or externally, we will have no caucus membership fee.

Our project focus extends to the infrastructure of the caucus. All infrastructure efforts will involve projects. Leadership by example will suffice to keep the caucus running smoothly. If you are looking for a title or someone to tell you what to do, you have come to the wrong place.

Infrastructure project example: Setting up a networking caucus infrastructure service will be a project unto itself and self-funded through internal and/or external fund-raising as necessary. If networking is your forte, volunteer and negotiate with other like-minded volunteers on how to run and accomplish the mission of the networking project.

We encourage the same approach to all projects, internal, external, or independent. However, how projects are run is entirely up to those who have volunteered for the projects.

Now, let’s get down to our immediate agenda. We expect to hold our first project brainstorming session(s) within the next two or three weeks.

We will provide facilitators and moderator for the first iteration of session(s). We anticipate the brainstorming sessions will range from 60 to 90 minutes. Come prepared so we can make effective use of the time. Handout material is not required but may facilitate the process.

We are working on an initial topic list and brainstorming session format. We will have fun learning as we go. Please come with your own topics and brainstorming format suggestions. Most important, come with an idea of what problem or project you personally want to address immediately. Let us know what project is burning a hole in your pocket.

The general session strategy is to brainstorm a list of projects, poll attendees for project priorities. poll attendees on which project they want to work on, provide networking suggestions, and help schedule follow-up project-specific meetings for those who volunteer for specific projects.

The first task is to schedule what days of the week or dates and times work for you for our initial caucus-centered brainstorming sessions. Please reply with your suggestions. We anticipate this will require several sessions each iteration that will lead to several repeating caucus-centered session cycles. This means we will be looking for volunteers for session and project facilitators and moderators.

How does this sound to you?

Please provide your preferred dates and times for the initial caucus-centered project brainstorming sessions.

Let’s do it!

Thoughts?

D.Pratt Tseramed, June 26, 2020
David.Demarest@R2FF.org
402-493-0873

You might be interested in

Criminal Justice at a Crossroads: Defund The Police or Privatization?

Published on in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Politics
Criminal Justice at a Crossroads: Defund The Police or Privatization?

For many years the United States has struggled with the dilemma of both efficiently and fairly providing for public safety. We have tried to do so through the failed government program we call the police department. Whether those failures are the result of innate flaws in our government system or evidence of our nation’s long history of state-sponsored racism seem to be a side-show debate the media circus has used to distract us from the truth.  The communities targeted certainly seem disproportionate. They are the poor and the minority, both vulnerable populations without the means to fight back. They’re always a popular goat of our failed tyrannical system. But in the light of tragedies and injustices like that of George Floyd, the real question should be what the solutions are. How can we prevent tragedies like this from happening the future?

There is no doubt that our criminal justice system is in need of dire reforms, but is #defundthepolice the answer? Are there other reforms to be considered, and is any of it enough? Finally, what about the benefits of privatization? Can community-based and free market solutions fill the gap where public law enforcement has failed?

If one is too squeamish for full privatization, a great deal of research has been conducted on the benefits of a blended system, but it does show the potential improvements we could see from something more privatized.

First Thing’s First: Qualified Immunity

George Floyd is certainly not the first public figure to spark protests, popular political movements, and even violent riots across the country. The flaws with our criminal justice system have been evident since the days of Rodney King, and frankly even long before that. It hasn’t really stopped, but it’s hard to say whether it’s gotten worse or we’re just seeing it for the first time because of technology. So with the ability to publicly share such obvious and incriminating evidence, why does it require so much civil unrest and public outrage to ensure any justice in police brutality cases? Much of that can be largely placed on the shoulders of qualified immunity.

All the public safety reforms in the world will mean little as long as the officers who enforce them are immune to accountability on the job. Many “defund the police” efforts have called for safety “community groups” sometimes armed or sometimes not, trained in “de-escalation” and dispute mediation” techniques, but what authority do they have and how will they use it? Let’s not forget that George Zimmerman, killer of Trayvon Martin was not a cop, but such a “community group member”

Qualified immunity for those acting on “behalf of the law” is not only unjust.  It is a danger to our communities, and if unaddressed the current “defund the police efforts” may simply lead to mob rule by a new evil taking place of the old.

Justin Amash’s Tri-Partisan bill would address this issue swiftly, but unfortunately will require immense support since Trump has made it clear he won’t support it.

Is America Ready to Disband the Police?

While hopes look high for the #defundthepolice efforts with the Minneapolis City Council approving unanimously,  the results of this program remain to be seen. First, there are a few pitfalls this movement may not be considering. For instance, have they considered the fact that pension funding for police officers, is a large chunk of the budget and is virtually untouchable? Or what about the fact that in some cases a department may run as much as nearly 1/3 of its budget on collected fines on minor public violations? Unless they also decriminalize victimless offenses, officers may turn to more aggressive techniques that result in more police violence and harassment of citizens to cover the difference. They will also need to address the existence of victimless crimes to rid their communities of  dangerous, black market elements that will still exist even if the the police aren’t confronting them.

Furthermore, is the general American public ready to support such a measure? Initial polling would seem to indicate otherwise with only 16% of the American public in support of “Defund the Police” efforts. On the other hand earlier surveys have shown 75% of Americans do support an overhaul of our evidently broken criminal justice system. Is there a logical compromise accompanied by sensible reforms that mainstream American can agree too?

Defunding Through Privatization

 One of the stated goals of #defundthepolice is to transfer police funding to other “more beneficial” public initiatives, as well as to re-prioritize the efforts of police in focusing on serious and violent crimes. Police privatization may be the best way to do just that. We’ve already discussed some of the pitfalls above, and why these initiatives might not go as planned. But there’s more…

First let’s consider that employees working for private security companies on average make about 47% less than unionized public police officers. Let’s also consider that private police companies working with limited capital will be forced to manage their priorities. According to Police Chief Magazine, privatization may actually soon be coming to you. Why? Mostly because of budget constraints. At least one county saved over $1 million switching to a privatized system.

Not only are budgets becoming a problem but recruitment has also been down for years. This trend may not be the end of the world according to the Marshall Project whose research showed that violent crime at the same time has been down. Correlation is not causation, but this does show that numbers don’t tell the whole story. If departments are forced to do so, they may better manage their resources. ‘

Private companies exist to do just that.  

What About Government Protections For Citizens? ‘

One of the most common fears surrounding privatization of the police is that it would lead to a rampant violation of citizens rights. The fear is that private security officers would not be subject to the same restrictions a publicly funded police force would. This can be true with security officers patrolling private property, for example, a mall security guard may search a suspected shoplifted without consent or probable cause. However, they cannot make an arrest.

Despite this pitfall, this would not be the case for a privatized municipal police force due to a groundbreaking civil rights case known as Marsh v. Alabama. The ruling indicated that officers performing duties of law enforcement in a community that was “open to the public” were subject to the same standards and regulations as public police officers. In other words if they were playing the function of law enforcement in a public space, they were just as bound as police officers to respect our constitutional rights. This and other case law would lead to the doctrine of “State Action” since the officers were seen as “State Actors” or acting on behalf of the government. 

A Police Force that Serves the Community

One of the greatest benefits of a privatized police force essentially boils down to motivation. Private sector security companies are motivated by the mission of creating an environment of public safety and order for their clients. Law enforcement agencies are designed simply to enforce existing laws and statutes. Their funding is either guaranteed through taxation and they thus have no motivation to earn it, or it’s otherwise derived through the harassment of its citizenry.

Private companies and organizations will also not only be more likely to face public scrutiny and legal troubles if they perform poorly, but often their members are motivated by more philanthropic ventures. Consider the example of Dale Brown, the owner and founder of the Detroit Threat Management Center.

His organization began as he says with him “A rifle, and a dog” and his goal was to make his community safe in the face of frequent robberies and home invasion where he worked in his Detroit community. His low-cost body guard program has been provided for free to society’s most vulnerable members, including domestic violence victims. He is proud to say that in 20 years of his program none of his officers or clients have ever been injured on the job, and officers regularly use nonviolent and de-escalation approaches in lieu of deadly force.

His service has resulted in companies worth millions of dollars in crime-ridden neighborhoods going from red to black in the first time in years, as well as renewing and revitalizing Detroit communities the police had given up on.

Dale Brown has often said the key to his success has been motivation and putting the citizen first.

“The cornerstone for protection is love, not violence, not guns, not laws, but love. You cannot and will not truly protect anything that you don’t love.”

Whatever your opinions on law enforcement and criminal justice reform, it’s hard to argue with that. Perhaps men in the private sector like Dale Brown should be more often listened to.

Dave Beaver, June 19, 2020

You might be interested in

WHAT ELSE WILL POLITICIANS DO TO AVOID THE RIGORS OF THE FREE MARKET?

Published on in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
WHAT ELSE WILL POLITICIANS DO TO AVOID THE RIGORS OF THE FREE MARKET?

Budding politicians and political junkies, here is a pithy commentary, with minor wordsmithing for clarity, excerpted from a lively ‘LP 2020 Delegates – Uncensored, Unmoderated‘ Facebook page discussion with D. Frank Robinson of Oklahoma, a ground-floor Libertarian who helped David Nolan with the documentation of our original Libertarian Party Statement of Principles (SoP):

https://www.facebook.com/groups/254985825071721/?multi_permalinks=694033467833619&comment_id=695285091041790&notif_id=1592055283423761&notif_t=feedback_reaction_generic&ref=noti

David Pratt Demarest to D Frank Robinson :

You too noticed that politics “does tend [to] employ every logical fallacy known”. Frank, that is the understatement of the twenty first century!

My approach, unforgivable as it may be, is to figure out why what you say is true using what von Mises called Praxeology. Mises Praxeology is the science of human action and decision making and the broader definition of Economics beyond mere finance. In other words, studying not just what people do but also why they choose to do it, their motivation for choosing a particular course of action.

For example, why do people choose to be Libertarians when it would be easier to go with the flow? Why do people gravitate toward politics instead of just building better mouse traps or other products and services that actually benefit people?

I hear people going on endlessly about the best strategy to get elected, providing lip-service but no action plan to achieve freedom, and never, never mentioning the free market, the real source of benefits and our Libertarian home turf. Consequently, I am understandably skeptical of the motives of many if not most politicians, including many Libertarian politicians.

Unfortunately, despite lip-service to freedom, the political motivations I see are pretty ugly in terms of Libertarian thought. To be fair and give credit where credit is due, a comparatively disproportionate number of Libertarians politicians truly are in it to further freedom. And, of course, there are many political gradients.

.

.

.

Those folks do the freedom cause a disservice and are part of the problem, not the solution. We know they dominate the duopoly. The question is how dominant they are in the LP.

In my opinion, whether or not they include the free market in their platform, and come with action plans to solve problems leveraging the benefits of the free market, tells me what I need to know about the sincerity of their freedom agenda, as opposed politics as usual for personal aggrandizement. Another tell-tale sign is whether they stoop to the level of using political correctness, i.e., lying to achieve a political purpose like getting elected.

My conclusions are not flattering to most politicians. Unfortunately, that includes many Libertarian politicians. When you take off the political ‘arrested paradigm’ blinders, it is pretty easy to spot the “I wanna get elected” gleam in their eyes, disingenuous political correctness, and insincere freedom advocacy that totally ignores the free market.

Thoughts?

D. Pratt Tseramed, June 13, 2020
David.Demarest@R2FF.org, 402-493-0873

You might be interested in

IN THE WAKE OF THE COVID-19 MELTDOWN, WHAT CAN THE LP LEARN FROM CONVENTIONGATE?

Published on in Activism/Free Market/Information/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
IN THE WAKE OF THE COVID-19 MELTDOWN, WHAT CAN THE LP LEARN FROM CONVENTIONGATE?

Quote from my post in ‘LNC – Business Discuss’ [with minor wordsmithing for clarity] in response to comments by Marc Montoni (LPRC 3rd iteration Co-founder ) and others regarding the chart showing LP committee staffing and appointment details/responsibilities posted by Nicholas Sarwark, LP Chair.

Three points:

1. Chair model:

Regardless of the strengths or shortcomings of strong or weak chair models, both models exist in an elective top-down political structure with all its democratic blessings and cronyism-prone faults. Hmmm. Top-down institutional authoritarian structure has not worked well for our tyranny of the majority government in the long run. Perhaps we need to look beyond the chair model and examine the underlying structure to determine faults and solutions.

2. Stepping back from emotions:

Many of us had the unfortunate opportunity to watch all of the LNC meetings, practice sessions, and the virtual convention. I believe the LNC meetings and the virtual convention were recorded. Personally, I am certainly glad that the more vocal LNC members and the rampaging, er, wise and professional majority of delegates stepped back from their emotions and made well considered thoughtful decisions (facetiously speaking).

Obviously, observations about who exhibited emotional behavior are subjective. However, my stomach is not up to watching the embarrassing replays. Once was enough. The evidence I saw was pretty clear and reminiscent of the stripper disruption during the 2016 LP national convention in Orlando. The same evidence was witnessed by many if not most of the delegates. They may want to watch the recordings again to refresh their memories.

3. Role of emotions:

Emotions are a critical part of our makeup. Emotions, appropriately used, are an effective early warning system to alert the brain about incoming information that may require engaging the brain and our self-aware rational capacity to perform objective analysis and design and implement solutions to address, mitigate, or build on the objective conclusions. Despite occasional emergency snap decisions that can be prepared for in advance, substituting emotions for the rational brain process rarely works well.

Emotions also play a critical feedback role to celebrate successes of our rational brain processes and actions. Unfortunately, ConventionGate provides little opportunity for celebration but presents ample opportunities to learn from mistakes. We shall see on the latter. The future of the LP may depend on it.

Summary:

Personally, I think the chair model and bylaws/RONR debates are the least of our problems. Obviously, Covid-19 was a significant contributor to our ConventionGate debacle. The LP had and may still have an opportunity to lead by example in comparison to our duopoly political neighbors during the Covid-19 pandemic.

We are stuck with our top-down elective structure for the time being. Are we capable of rising above our structural faults? ConventionGate was not a good start. How will we conclude this ugly LP chapter? Time will tell.

My personal emotional and objective reactions to ConventionGate:

My, how politics brings out the best in us. Well, that’s not very honest, is it? Let me rephrase. My, how top-down emotionally driven politics brings out the worst in us [insert “upchuck”].

My objective and emotional response concerns include how potential LP candidates and members will react to this sorry spectacle.

Of even more concern to me is the reaction of existing members. Some may react by excluding or expelling various factions they disagree with using a skewed non-hybrid second sitting in a fit of un-Libertarian-like opportunism or spite. Others may give up the ghost of liberty in this current snapshot of the LP and move on to more freedom friendly homes focused on our free market home turf.

My gosh, how did the words “Liberty”, “Freedom”, and “Free Market” creep into this political discussion?

https://www.facebook.com/groups/FreeMarketAction/

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2999904110089338&set=a.2011194558960303&type=3&eid=ARCDMhaA4lU6Rl3IPme5NojcQJlyyy5O2Tx1pkqpB1NnJ3xRLffBjnG5pe9p_IXT6TtPGkwZWpoMduZc

Thoughts?

D. Pratt Tseramed, June 11, 2020
David.Demarest@R2FF.org, 402-493-0873

You might be interested in

HOW CAN YOU MAXIMIZE YOUR POLITICAL CAMPAIGN AND PROJECT DONATION BANG FOR THE BUCK?

Published on in Activism/Information/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
HOW CAN YOU MAXIMIZE YOUR POLITICAL CAMPAIGN AND PROJECT DONATION BANG FOR THE BUCK?

Political donors are notoriously naive. They get so giddy about the political process, their favorite candidates, and political agenda projects that they forget about due diligence precautions inherent in the free market. They leave the door wide open for bad actors.

Let’s stop and think about what attracts bad actors. Money and power that translates into money. The biggest pots of money are in the free market. True, the free market does attract some bad actors.

Free markets however, are primarily merit-based. Bad actors find it more difficult to avoid having to embrace the free market requirement that nothing gets produced without effort. They might actually have to work hard and earn their way, exactly what they are trying to avoid.

Where can bad actors go where they don’t have to earn their way. Bingo, You got it. Politics. True, the pots of money in politics are not as big as those in the free market. However, political money, primarily in campaigns and political agenda projects, is donor based. Donations are harder to track and easier to cook the books on.

Free market ventures must meet generally accepted accounting practices and their long range survival depends on how profitable they are. In the case of non-profits, their success is nevertheless measurable and their ability to attract talent depends on the salaries they can offer.

Not so with politics. The profit is getting elected, influencing policy, or sending a message. The modus operandi of bad actors in the political arena is to recruit candidates, initiate donor-attractive projects, or insert themselves into campaigns or projects based on alleged management, marketing, or fund-raising skills, particularly the latter. The next step is to offer or insist on control of the campaign or project finances.

Once intrenched in a campaign or project, how can bad actors attain their goal of enriching themselves at the expense of the endeavor at hand? Inflated performance fees, misrepresented performance, siphoning off donations, cooking the books, sloppy reporting with no or friendly audits, just for openers.

The big prizes for bad actors, however, are the funds left over when the campaign or project is completed. The telltale sign of the opportunity for malfeasance is money left over and and vague or non-existing policies on how to distribute the spoils. Sound familiar? A campaign or project that is sincerely intended to achieve the stated goal will typically use all funds available to ensure victory or achieve success.

It is conceivable that an efficiently run campaign or project could end up with surplus funds. The ethical approach would be to escrow surplus funds for a future campaign or follow-on project and do so with crystal clear well-documented and publicly reported transparency.

Here is a dose of reality for political donors. When a campaign or agenda project has run its course, political donors, unlike free market investors, predictably move on to the next exciting political drama and lose interest in how the campaign or project finances were wrapped up.

It is easier in politics for bad actors to split the leftovers, leave a trail of unpaid bills, head for the hills with their ill-gotten gains, hole up until they run out of money, and then set the trap for their next political campaign or project financial victim.

How could you as a donor smoke out bad actors short of testing for psychopathic behavior?

  • Do your due diligence as if it was a free market endeavor
  • Get involved in the cause, campaign, or project you believe in
  • Insist on a commitment to financial transparency
  • Insist on published lists of board, staff, and credential profiles
  • Insist on a financial prospectus
  • Insist on a business plan
  • Insist on frequent financial reports reviewed by an independent auditor
  • Insist on profit retention and distribution policies
  • Guard the campaign wallet like it was your own

Political donors are to be congratulated on their enthusiastic largess. However, the challenges and responsibilities for donors are more than just taking advantage of an opportunity to avoid getting their fingers dirty.

A wise donor actively participates in the endeavor they are supporting. They ensure that their donation dollars are wisely used and do not fall into the hands of bad actors. They hold the beneficiaries of their philanthropy accountable.

Click the following link for a related meme and story:

HOW CAN YOU TELL IF A CANDIDATE IS SERIOUS ABOUT GOING FOR THE WIN?

D. Pratt Tseramed, June 3, 2020
David.Demarest@R2FF.org, 402-493-0873

You might be interested in

HOW CAN YOU TELL IF A CANDIDATE IS SERIOUS ABOUT GOING FOR THE WIN?

Published on in Activism/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
HOW MUCH MONEY WAS LEFT OVER AND WHOSE POCKETS IT WENT INTO?

Follow the money. Campaigns get the big donation bucks. Be careful who you select as your campaign finance manager. Require frequent campaign finance reports audited independently.

Those who are serious about going for the win and maximizing campaign impact will aggressively raise funds and spend everything on the campaign.

Go for it, Jo Jorgensen – spend it all!

Thoughts?

D. Pratt Tseramed, June 2, 2020
david.demarest, 402-493-0873

You might be interested in

Study Shows Wuhan Virus Was Already Adapted To Humans. Escaped From Wuhan Lab? Another Wuhan ‘Woopsie’ Smoking Gun?

Published on in Activism/Health/News/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
Study Shows Wuhan Virus Was Already Adapted To Humans. Escaped From Wuhan Lab? Another Wuhan 'Woopsie' Smoking Gun?

Another Wuhan ‘Woopsie’ smoking gun? A recent study shows that Covid-19 was not from animals in Wuhan market. It appears to be a natural virus already adapted to humans, likely escaped from a lab. Virus material was transported from the North Carolina lab to the lab in Wuhan. The article at the following link will help connect the dots.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/virus-not-from-animals-in-wuhan-market-62-nations-call-for-investigations_3356127.html?fbclid=IwAR3OKh2s6AnP0ZRkZcYxsHUdYZ7HsbizJgQL1JTdA-JCPFyPYrB6geGvmHQ.

Evidence of a human engineered virus and malicious release has not been established to date. There are, however, anecdotal discussions on the street of three suspicious cut and paste sections in the genome. I am sure that there has been considerable research on the possibility of virus genome tinkering.

Will research results ever see the light of day? Paraphrasing a recent Cato Institute statement, those who take government scientific studies seriously “need to have their heads examined.”

62 nations are now calling for investigations. China insists that the investigation must be performed by the World Health Organization (WHO). Oh, by the way, Maoist WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom praised CCP handling of the Wuhan ‘Whoopsie’ outbreak.

China has subsequently destroyed all viruses housed in the Wuhan lab ‘as a precaution’. Convenient timing before insisting that investigation of smoking gun evidence by be done only by WHO? Yikes!

It is widely acknowledged that WHO is in bed with Chinese Communists. During a recent televised interview, a WHO representative carelessly refused to answer any questions related to the pandemic status in Taiwan for the obvious reason that the Chinese Communists do not recognize Taiwan.

WHO and their Director General Tedros Adhanom clearly are a puppet organization at the behest of the CCP. Those who take WHO investigations seriously need to have their heads examined.

We now know that WHO and Chinese Communists hid the Wuhan outbreak for over two critical months. China used aggressive disinformation to discount the seriousness of outbreak while allowing thousands of infected Covid-19 carriers to travel around the world.

First China said that the virus came from US, then they changed their story and claimed it came from Italy, and more recently they said it came from France.

Consistent with the Socialist dictum of ‘ends justifies means’, Chinese Communists have lied about the Wuhan outbreak right out of the gate, resulting in the early failure to contain the spread and subsequent hundreds of thousand of unnecessary preventable tragic deaths. The CCP and WHO are still lying and aggressively spreading disinformation about both the first and second outbreak waves in China.

.

.

The next step is to follow the money trail and the transport of virus material from US to the Wuhan science facility that may have been guilty of sloppy lab practices. In addition to the documented $3.7 million illegal transfer to Wuhan lab by Dr. Anthony Fauci, what was Fauci’s role in virus transfers from US Dietrich Lab in North Caroline to the Wuhan lab?

As a matter of public record, we know that Fauci fingerprints are all over the Wuhan lab. On national TV for all to see, Fauci (and Bill ‘Depopulation’ Gates) defended the WHO and Chinese Communist handling of the Wuhan outbreak. And WHO, of course, could not say enough good things about China’s response to the Wuhan outbreak. Duh! It does not a rocket scientist to connect the dots.

Breaking news, China has sacked officials after a second Covid-19 outbreak despite draconian lockdowns. Following the time honored ‘ends justifies means’ Socialist ideological tradition, Chinese Communists have lied in the past, are lying now, and will lie in the future. Disinformation continues to be aggressively disseminated by the CCP and WHO.

Echoing Dr. Ron Paul, disinformation continues to proliferate from the mouths of US health agency heads. What does that suggest about Fauci and Bill ‘Depopulation’ Gates who have openly defended WHO and Chinese Communist for their handling of the Wuhan outbreak?

Folks, how much pandemic carnage are you willing to put up with until we put the smoking gun Covid-19 US pandemic mishandling and disinformation controversy to bed to prevent the US health agencies from doing even more catastrophic damage.

Thoughts?

D. Pratt Tseramed, May 20, 2020
David.Demarest@R2FF.org, 402-493-0873

You might be interested in

Why Is LNC Acting Like Trump At A Press Conference? Are Otherwise Good LNC Members Saddled With The Wrong Purpose?

Published on in Activism/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
Why Is LNC Acting Like Trump At A Press Conference? Are Otherwise Good LNC Members Saddled With The Wrong Purpose?

We have a wealth of talented, professional, and good people on the Libertarian National Committee. What in the world is driving them to act like an out of control Donald Trump at a press conference? How can we help them get through this with the Libertarian Party intact?

Let’s take a deep breath, step back, and reflect rationally on what might be behind this out of character behavior.

To start with, LNC members are under a huge burden of stress with the Covid-19 pandemic and the resulting need to reschedule and relocate the 2020 national convention. But LNC members normally handle crises well. What else could explain their out of character behavior.

Are convention rescheduling concerns and blaming leadership for proposed convention options a legitimate justification for their out of character behavior or a convenient cop out? I leave that for the reader to judge. Regardless, how can we help them get through it?

It may be more productive to examine other possible causes than might suggest constructive solutions. However, before we get to solutions, here are some additional mitigating circumstance to consider.

First, does politics as usual bring out the worst in us? Absolutely, in my opinion. However, given the explicit political nature of our organization, that is a problem that will not go away and we must counter by applying Libertarian principles. The reality is that most human actions have a political element under the hood. How we channel our political behavior is another matter.

Second, is the LNC authoritarian top-down structure also a cause for dysfunction? Yes, in my opinion. However, we are stuck with a top-down structure as long as the LNC is an elective body.

The LNC, like most political party national committees, is made up entirely of elected members. The LNC includes officers, At Large members, regional representatives, and regional alternates, all elected by national convention delegates. The LNC is by definition a top-down structure. Whether it is an authoritarian top-down structure is open to debate. My assessment is that all top-down structures are authoritarian by design and typically but not necessarily in practice.

There is no simple way to change the LNC top-down nature, which flies in the face of my understanding that the purpose of the Libertarian movement is to fight top-down institutional authoritarianism at every turn. Regardless, there is no choice today but to accept the political nature and top-down structure and commit to circumventing those limitations if the LNC is to succeed in achieving the Libertarian goal of freedom.

Given that the LNC is saddled with a political nature and top-down structure, what facet of the LNC structure can the LNC control? Perhaps the operational purpose? That begs the question: Are you willing to consider the possibility that the LNC’s function is not appropriately purposed?

Perhaps looking at LNC strengths and weaknesses would be a useful method to analyze the possible issue of the LNC being mispurposed. What strengths and weaknesses can we distill from the LNC’s top-down structure and diversity of elected representative views and purposes?

First, here are specific LNC weaknesses that are outside their control:

The elective structure and diverse views and purposes present considerable challenges that are outside LNC control. As a restult, the LNC has considerable difficulty agreeing on what to do, why to do it, how to do it, when to do it, and how to pay for it, all of which are preconditions to getting stuff done successfully. This inherent weakness is difficult to avoid in a top-down political structure.

Another weakness outside LNC control is the fact that the LNC is NOT an organization composed of individuals who volunteer to work together based on a comprehensive list of shared views and purposes as is the case with volunteer projects.

The LNC is an elective body whose individual members are theoretically expected to reflect the will of the majority of the constituents they represent despite the wide range of diverse views and purposes of their constituents, not to mention minorities whom they also are supposed to represent but in name only because the minorities differ from the majority with their own set of diverse views and purposes.

Unfortunately, the LNC is stuck with elective representative top-down structure weaknesses that are outside their control and limit their ability to get stuff done. Further, the top-down structure fosters passing the buck on responsibilities and stifles innovation. We must face the fact that In the foreseeable future we cannot change these inherent weaknesses that are outside LNC control. What to do?

Not all is lost. Despite the top-down structure and elective diversity limitations, elective committees are exceptionally well suited to act as think tanks to brainstorm project ideas. The diversity of LNC member backgrounds and rational talents works well to ensure an over-brimming melting pot of innovative ideas.

LNC members are also good at communicating their innovative brainstorming ideas to those outside the top-down structure, including affiliates and independent volunteers who are willing and able to take the bull by the horns and run with LNC project ideas on top of their local projects.

The same talented people who struggle to get stuff done within a top-down elective structure have remarkable talents best expressed outside their parent top-down structures as the ability to tackle and carry innovative projects through to successful conclusions. We see it all the time. Our talented LNC members are no exception and excel at it.

When committee-bound folks, limited by top-down constraints, step outside their confining structure, their accomplishments are amazing. They take the bull by the horns, surround themselves with like-minded folks outside their structural constraints, lead by example, make and keep commitments, and get a hell of a lot of amazing stuff done.

Other strengths that the LNC could leverage despite their top-down and elective diversity limitations are the underutilized talents of LNC members to act as project liaisons and facilitators when invited, and providers of moral and logistical support to those outside the structure who are accomplishing projects critical the Libertarian movement agenda of achieving freedom goals.

Is the LNC open to reconsidering the purpose of their operational strategy and leveraging their brainstorming, liaison, facilitation, and moral support skills of their talented members in order to circumvent their top-down and elective diversity constraints? Time will tell. The long term success of the LP and Libertarian movement may depend on Libertarians’ willingness to reexamine the purpose of the LNC and modify it as necessary to better suit members skills within a top-down elective structure.

As Ken Moellman, our over-achiever Libertarian from Kentucky, wisely said, it is time to “take a deep breath”. In this time of pandemic turmoil and convention concerns, let us take a time out, smell the sweet scent of freedom that Libertarians seek, and tackle our Libertarian and LNC challenges with a refreshed and renewed sense of purpose.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2960585530687863&set=a.2011194558960303&type=3&eid=ARAnGmShz2QF2PYTFu2GM3VrllyJ0mxFthYI2UjQv-onTNg1xpv4gQNrwy9rw1_4_Vsreni_4prI7mNC

Thoughts?

D. Pratt Tseramed, May 14, 2020
David.Demarest@R2FF.org
402-493-0873

You might be interested in

Vaccine Conspiracy – Fact Or Fiction – Smoke But Is There A Fire? If True, Consequences For Mankind?

Published on in Activism/Information/News/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
Vaccine Conspiracy - Fact Or Fiction - Smoke But Is There A Fire? If True, Consequences For Mankind?

I am not a fan of conspiracy theories. Occam’s Razor favors simple models. However, the pieces are starting to fit together. A lot of smoke but is there a fire?

Is Dr. Anthony Fauci “the Bernie Madoff of Science”, as alleged in this 26-minute video? How about Robert Redfield of the CDC?

https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D5wHzrYtV5lw%26feature%3Dshare%26fbclid%3DIwAR0VBLo-fNkNHo8w1UVISVe0f2o-K9Y-ZLR6NUxo09OenErdY6xXMZ_9TAI&h=AT306QU3XEiq223g5OrAKt-rNLy40B1NI-ogJdZwje73EnVu1Nfa_Bf-jkWFanjCL30aI5HPz6TNBddzF83726m9di1hvAHPU56TNDVNzR8feS7IfUb_Q1pqugIdfZahLPw9VLzNz8XFflukOcUbsk1-0pKIkgLs2fWwIg

If you clicked on the link above you received the following message: “This video has been removed for violating YouTubes’s Community Guideline”. This should give you a clue as to the length that the perpetrators and their government cronies are willing to go to to cover up their crimes.

Folks, this is serious stuff that government is flexing their cover-up muscles on. You can add YouTube and Facebook to the list of bad guys in the meme above. However, their complicity prompts me to insert the rogue’s gallery meme at the following link. If Facebook invalidates this link, I will forward it to you upon request:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2948430375236712&set=a.2011194558960303&type=3&eid=ARCHhZBsinxiDyPGHUncjKdnATdW2q5HBVri-yy42DGvMLYx7hFLmeM3N47MaUa5jMiuR3JqtGJNEwvu

The meme at the link above does not mention any names of persons, just organizational acronyms with no obscenity, and just normal head shots of a sordid assortment of strange bedfellows in the pandemic vaccine arena. I should add YouTube and Facebook to the meme but they are just indirect government social media lapdogs not otherwise associated with the pandemic vaccine controversy.

Where does Bill Gates fit into this picture with his vaccine, vaccine tracking, and depopulation agenda in alliance with Dr. Fauci, FDA, CDC, and the discredited World Health Organization who are obviously in bed with the Chinese Communists.

Hmmm. Dr. Fauci is on the board of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Gates has contributed large sums to the FDA and CDC. Why?

This is scary stuff. If true, Fauci, Redfield, and government agency criminal behavior have caused tragic health consequences that make the Mafia and drug cartels look like choir boys.

Talk about being desensitized to moral issues! If a fraction of this video is true, it should be prosecutable criminal behavior on the scale of genocide and crimes against humanity.

Can we trust Congress to ferret out the truth before pandemics and FDA/CDC ‘Death by Regulation” destroy our health, our economy, and our way of life? We shall see.

.

.

.

.

.

.

See what conclusions you come to. If you are as concerned as I am about how this video relates to the Covid-19 pandemic, feel free to share this video. In the midst of a severe pandemic, how promptly we handle this alleged threat literally represents life or death for hundreds of thousands if not millions of people.

Thoughts?

D. Pratt Tseramed, May 8, 2020

David.Demarest@R2FF.org, 402-493-0873

.

.

.

.

Postscript:

The subsequent “Plandemic” debunking post strikes me as authorities scrambling to sanitize their reputations with cover-up spin-doctoring.

I have noticed 4 kinds of responses to the conspiracy and debunking posts:

1. True believers who are prone to falling for every conspiracy theory – on the fringe

2. True believers who are prone to falling for anything that authorities say – truly dangerous

3. Those who could care less or can’t be bothered – understandable but ignorance is bliss can be just as dangerous

4. Rational skeptics who intuitively consider the big picture and take time for due diligence to fill in gaps

I believe that understanding the big picture requires evaluation of both actions and motives (Ludwig von Mises, Praxeology – study of human action and decision-making, the broader definition of Economics).

Thoughts?

1 2 3 … 5
Go to Top