Tag archive

Political Correctness

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

Will You Sit Still While AOC, BS, And EW Put The Socialism Ring In Your Nose?

Published on in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
Socialism will be nice and peaceful?

Republishing this meme about AOC is all the more appropriate and timely with B.S. (remarkably appropriate initials!) and E.W. (Even Wordier?) leading in Iowa Caucus polls. If you replace AOC with EW or BS, what do you get? More of the same? Are both just watered down versions of AOC? Do you agree that EW is even worse than BS and almost as bad as JS in the Green Party?

Why do I say that? The recent squabble between EW and BS dramatically illustrates their shared lust for getting elected to a position of authority over others and ‘ends justifies means’ persistence in doing whatever it takes to get the most votes, a disease that permeates many if not most political parties and campaigns. Unfortunately, the LP is not immune to disgusting ‘politics as usual’ and ‘get-elected-itis’ political correctness, the politician’s weapon of mass deception.

The danger of a Socialist takeover is real. The appeal of socialism to impressionable teenagers and young adults is undeniable and natural. The economic and political awakening of many raised in a positive environment of social tolerance unfortunately has been overwhelmed by total immersion in the tax-funded socialist brainwashing cartel cauldron we euphemistically call public education.

Our well-meaning but brainwashed young advocates of socialism have yet to come to grips with the fact that socialism has never worked and invariably wreaks economic and social havoc on every society it contaminates. Worse yet, when socialism fails, it leaves the door wide open for dictator wannabes who justify the use of force as necessary to make socialism work.

Even with the use of force, socialist governments rapidly implode due to accelerated cronyism-induced bankruptcy, if not overthrown before then. The socialist implosion cycle is disastrous for most and beneficial only temporarily for those in power, only for the short duration while they retain control. You would think that the fatality rate among socialist dictators would be an effective deterrence. Evidently the siren song of free-lunch power is too tempting to pass up despite the fatality threat.

How can we counter this disturbing trend among our young future leaders? We need to ask ourselves which of our candidates offer a serious education reform alternative to counter the insidious socialism inroads among our our future leaders who have been subjected to public education brainwashing.

How can we identify effective anti-socialist education reform candidates? For starters, they are unlikely to come from the ranks of candidates afflicted with the equally insidious malady of political correctness.

We need to look at candidates that consistently set a good example with penetrating objectivity complemented by total disregard for political correctness. I see only two among those left on the list of nearly 50 candidates who reflect my education reform and rejection of political correctness criteria and perhaps only one with the additional education career prerequisite.

I think most of you already know who those two candidates are, but if not, put on your objective thinking caps, tell us who you think meets these standards, and justify your choices.

Thoughts?

D. Pratt Tseramed, January 18, 2020

You might be interested in

Would Legally Mandated Pinnochio-Nose GMO Therapy For All Politicians Reverse The Unfortunate Reality That Politics Usually Brings Out The Worst In Us?

Published on in Activism/Business/Free Market/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack

Here some humorous and serious consequences of requiring all politicians to undergo Pinnochio nose genetic modification:

  1. Proliferation of politicians and candidates on crutches after tripping over their own noses and the noses of their colleagues, forcing governing bodies to provide crutches and wheel chairs as standard equipment for all members of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches
  2. Exponential increase in Guinness nose length records
  3. Explosive new market in nose camouflage products
  4. Sharp increase in the demand for nose job surgeries
  5. Laws passed forcing health insurance policies to cover nose job surgeries
  6. Decline of political correctness as a viable political tool
  7. Nose length contests replace political genital length comparisons
  8. Dramatic shift in political integrity or the lack thereof from liars contests to truth-telling contests
  9. Shoe on the other foot as politicians lose their advantage in dealing with supporters, constituents, and other politicians
  10. Politicians forced to either A) admit that governments exist solely for the benefit of those who govern, or B) suffer embarrassing nose-length consequences
  11. Politicians forced to own up to the fact that there is nothing that governments can do for us that we can’t do better by and for ourselves
  12. Two-party system flounders as smaller parties sporting shorter-nosed candidates win the respect of voters due to physically measurable differences in integrity
  13. Driving home what we already implicitly know about politicians but don’t admit, that the real goal of most politicians is just to gain power over others and the perks that go with power like hot dogs and beer go with baseball
  14. Private sector entrepreneurs, with no incentive or need for political correctness, become our leaders by example with corresponding economic and societal improvements including but not limited to higher standards of living and more freedom for all
  15. _____________________________

Fill in the blank with your own prognostications about the consequences and benefits of the unmasking of politically-correct, disingenuous politicians exposed by the length of their nose.

Even though we recognize that the humorous but unrealistic possibility of politicians with Pinnochio-nose afflictions is a fantasy, we might pause to reflect on this implausible scenario and come to the conclusion that politics invariably brings out the worst in us.

By contrast, we can achieve many more concrete economic and social advances by refocusing on free market successes and private sector leaders by example as they act in their own self-interest and cement their economic success as they establish a reputation for telling us the truth about the benefits of their products.

Most of us are realistic enough not to expect perfection from free-market entrepreneurs. Nevertheless, we intuitively know that private sector leaders are far more trustworthy than politicians spouting politically correct bromides and platitudes intended to pull the wool over the eyes of constituents while ripping them off to the tune of outrageous taxes.

If we are individually insightful and successful in assessing the deceitfulness of many if not most politicians, more truthful liberty-leaning candidates just might win more elections. Those elected in such circumstances just might help us get rid of the delusional notion that politics as usual is the only solution to mankind’s problems.

Point of fact, politics is the problem, not the solution. Further, lying politicians spouting obvious politically correct nonsense are the purveyors of the problem.

The solution lies not in politics but in the private sector. Part of the inarguable proof for this truism is graphically demonstrated by the obvious fact that governments inevitably collapse, typically in less than 200 years due to cronyism-induced bankruptcy if not overthrown before then. Hmmm? Now, what about the longevity of free markets?

Governments and politicians come and go with predictable regularity. However, free markets, an awesome reflection of our rational capacity, have never failed in the entire history of mankind. This historically established fact about the contrasting longevity of governments and free markets clearly suggests that institutional authoritarian ‘politics as usual’ is not a good representation of our rational capacity.

Roll over, politicians. Make room for the real purveyors of integrity and success in dealing with human challenges, our private-sector free-market leaders by example, the motor of the world.

Thoughts?

D. Pratt Tseramed, January 7, 2020

You might be interested in

Go to Top