Liberation Library [4] Blood Makes the Green Grass Grow: Conditioned Killers in War and Society

In this first video/documentary style podcast, I review Lt. Col. Dave Grossman’s seminal work On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. In doing so, I examine mankind’s inherent resistance to taking human life. Next, we take a look at the US Army’s discovery of this resistance and their subsequent efforts to overcome it. Finally, I examine Dave Grossman himself, his overarching thesis, and his side business, where he conditions government goons to kill reflexively.

Pick up a (second hand) copy of On Killing (Amazon Affiliate Link)

Liberation Library [4] is brought to you by:

The Liberty Weekly Amazon Affiliate Link

Our new Murray Rothbard “Enemy of the State” polygon line of merchandise! 15% OFF w/ Promo code: ROTHBARD

Our Liberty Classroom Affiliate Link

The Liberty Weekly Patreon Page: help support the show and gain access to tons of bonus content! Become a patron today!

Become a Patron!

Show Notes:

James Corbett: WWIII Is Over (If You Want It)

Cut: Lonnie On Killing

vsmproductions: Harry Recounts Killing a German Soldier in WWII

The Christmas Truce | History

Soldiers of Conscience [2008 Film] (Affiliate Link)

Dave Grossman’s Killology

A Day With ‘Killollogy’ Police Trainer Dave Grossman by Radley Balko

The Police Trainer Who Teaches Cops to Kill | The New Yorker

Fair Use Notice: This video contains some copyrighted material whose use has not been authorized by the copyright owners. We believe that this not-for-profit, educational, and/or criticism or commentary use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

 

The post Liberation Library [4] Blood Makes the Green Grass Grow: Conditioned Killers in War and Society appeared first on Liberty Weekly.

Source: Liberty Weekly – Liberation Library [4] Blood Makes the Green Grass Grow: Conditioned Killers in War and Society

Eight Politically Incorrect Benefits of Cryptocurrency

Due to surging exchange rates in the past few months, the opening of Bitcoin futures, and the likelihood of Bitcoin exchange-traded funds in the near future, there is renewed mainstream interest in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Mainstream investors tend to be attracted to the profit potential, portfolio diversification, and technological curiosities of cryptocurrency. But there are other benefits of cryptocurrencies which may scare away the average investor. Let us consider eight activities which can be performed with or aided by Bitcoin and its alternatives that will be cheered by political outsiders to the chagrin of the establishment. 1. Tax Evasion Charles Stross famously complained that Bitcoin “looks like it was designed as a weapon intended to damage central banking and money issuing banks, with a Libertarian political agenda in mind—to damage states ability to collect tax and monitor their citizens’ financial transactions.” The problem is that he views this as a negative. From a moral standpoint, taxation is armed robbery, slavery, racketeering, trespassing, communicating threats, receiving stolen money, and conspiracy to commit the aforementioned crimes. If anyone dared to challenge the state’s monopoly on tax collection, they could face any of these criminal charges. By doing business in cryptocurrencies and taking additional steps to protect one’s identity (Bitcoin is pseudonymous rather than anonymous, though other cryptocurrencies are fully anonymous), one can keep part or all of one’s income and stored wealth away from Leviathan’s watchful eye. Establishment politicians and pundits will decry tax evasion as immoral. But as Murray Rothbard writes, “Just as no one is morally required to answer a robber truthfully when he asks if there are any valuables in one’s house, so no one can be morally required to answer truthfully similar questions asked by the State, e.g., when filling out income tax returns.”[1] The weapon of cryptocurrency is thus more of a shield than a sword, though it may be employed in an offensive posture (see #8). Read the entire article at ZerothPosition.com References: Rothbard, Murray (1982). The Ethics of Liberty. Humanities Press. p. 183

The post Eight Politically Incorrect Benefits of Cryptocurrency appeared first on The Zeroth Position.

Source: Reece Liberty.Me – Eight Politically Incorrect Benefits of Cryptocurrency

Ep. 21 – The College Bubble And Manufactured Adolescence

itunes pic

Jeff and Tony discuss the fact that people are remaining in a state of childhood entirely too long.  Remember how everyone’s grandparents were married with several children by the ripe old age of 25?  Nowadays, it’s hard to find a 25 year old that has a real career and does not live at their parents’ house.

Part of the problem is education.  We tackle this, with a special emphasis on a subject near and dear to our hearts: Outrageous College Tuition.  Enjoy.

Recorded 12/13/17 – Show notes below

Peter Schiff Interviews College Grads: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXpwAOHJsxg

Check out Dr. Epstein’s new book on teenagers: http://amzn.to/2B5g6zO

Tom Woods’ episode with Dr. Robert Epstein on the topic: https://tomwoods.com/ep-1050-how-state-and-society-invented-adolescence-and-screwed-up-young-people/

The Best And Brightest Of Yale: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMc8pczn-hs

The Rise In The Cost Of College:

Image result for college tuition graph

Mike Rowe Speaks To Reason On The College Tuition Crisis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzKzu86Agg0

 

Net Neutrality is big in the news again.  Check out our very first episode on this topic: Episode 1: Thoughts on Net Neutrality.

Source: Don’t Waste Your Hate Podcast – Ep. 21 – The College Bubble And Manufactured Adolescence

FPF #133 – The Drug War with Brian Saady

On FPF #133, Biran Saady comes on the show to discuss the drug war and how it devastates Mexico. Brian explains how the American drug habit creates a $100 billion black market for deadly cartels to get rich on. Brian describes how the cartels influence Mexican politics, media, and police. Brian focuses on the impact of the drug war on Mexican citizens. 

Brian is a freelance writer and he has been published in the American Conservative, The Libertarian Insitute, and The Mises Institute. Brian is the author of several books including America’s Drug War is Devastating Mexico and The Drug War: A Trillion Dollar Con Game. Brian’s website, Twitter, and Facebook.

Source: Foreign Policy Focus – FPF #133 – The Drug War with Brian Saady

Puritans, part 2: New England Pharisees

“Religion, taking every mortal form
But that pure and Christian faith makes warm,
Where not to vile fanatic passion urged,
Or not in vague philosophies submerged,
Repulsive with all Pharisaic leaven,
And making laws to stay the laws of Heaven!”
— From “Ethnogenesis,” by Henry Timrod

South Carolinian Henry Timrod penned these words in February 1861 at the meeting of the First Confederate Congress at Montgomery, Alabama. Many regarded Timrod as the “poet laureate” of the Confederacy because his evocative works potently blended lyrical composition with patriotism for his nation, the South.

In “Ethnogenesis,” this teacher, tutor, and devout Anglican boldly describes a people who self-proclaim superior sanctity and feel divinely ordained to impose their will by force, drawing the comparison of the ancient Pharisees to Yankees. But just exactly how did they get there? I began heading down this historical rabbit hole in Puritans, part 1: Coming to America, so let’s dig a little deeper, shall we?

“The Hebrew Republic”

Just as the Pharisees were once “separated ones,” New England Pilgrims cloistered themselves in an effort to promote and protect their stringent definitions of piety. The Pharisees were preservers of pure Mosaic law, the Puritans too were steeped in strict rules and draconian enforcement thereof. In fact, instead of embracing the New Covenant of Jesus fulfilling the Law, the Pilgrims were steeped in legalism while trying to institute a “Christian Israel” in Massachusetts.

According to Jewish scholar Dr. David Ariel, “the early New England Puritans saw … King Charles I as Pharaoh, the Atlantic Ocean as the Red Sea, America as the Promised Land, and Boston as the new Jerusalem.” With its roots in Renaissance humanism, this Christian Hebraism was seen as the cornerstone for creating a new society based upon social and economic ideals of the Hebrew Bible.

In fact in 1636, John Cotton, the central theologian and minister of Massachusetts Bay Colony, drafted “Moses, His Judicials” at the behest of colony magistrates. His writings became the basis for Massachusetts’ first legal code and modeled its provisions solely on Hebrew Scripture’s vision for a faith-based polity and society.

John Cotton’s grandson Cotton Mather, who was a dominant Puritan minister and author in his own right, “quoted widely from the entire canon of Hebrew literature including the Hebrew Bible, Talmud, Midrash, Rashi, Maimonides, Nachmanides, and Zohar,” wrote Ariel. Mather “was even reported to have started wearing a skullcap at home and calling himself ‘rabbi.’”

John Bunyan’s influential “Pilgrim’s Progress” was filled with the Scriptural hermeneutics of abandoning the formality, liturgy, and confessionalism of high-church Christianity, and promoting works and salvation through sincerity and what the Pilgrims called a new “pure” faith. Yet, the Puritans weren’t really progressing or reforming.

Rather, they were recycling – trading 1,600-year-old Christian history and traditions for those of the ancient Hebrews. It’s almost as if the Puritans were just reinventing themselves as Judaizers to whom the Apostle Paul wrote the entire New Testament book of “Galatians” as a way to correct this heresy of the early Church.

A sectional divide only deepened

Thirty-five years after the English settled in Jamestown and 22 years after the Pilgrims landed in Plymouth, the English Civil Wars were unfolding in back across the Atlantic. It was a complicated series of battles between Parliamentarians (a.k.a. “Roundheads”) and Royalists (“Cavaliers”).

These wars were chiefly over the form and function of how the kingdoms of England, Ireland, and Scotland should be governed. And with the grueling 11-year power struggles obviously came religious clashes, most notably for England an intense face-off between the pro-crown Anglicans and pro-parliament Puritans.

In fact, some historians call the English Civil Wars the “Puritan Revolution.And Oliver Cromwell – the Roundhead political and military leader who became “1st Lord Protector of the Commonwealth” during the short-lived republican governance of the British Isles – came to be known as the Puritan Moses.

Obviously, these English conflicts had ripple effects for the colonies in America. The New England Puritans were staunch parliamentarians, while Virginians were solidly royalists, further widening the manifest ideological and religious divide that already existed between Northern and Southern colonists.

Many Royalist gentry flocked to Virginia during the Cromwell Protectorate in an effort to escape “entail and primogeniture” (a system in which only the first-born son gets all the land of the father), growing the cavalier population and strengthening the colony’s already distinct culture. Virginia was so devoted to the crown that when the English monarchy was restored in 1660, King Charles II called her the “Old Dominion” as thanks.

Massachusetts domination

By this time, New Sweden, the Swedish Colony along the Delaware Valley, had been defeated by the Dutch Republic. And by 1674, the First Anglo-Dutch War had come to an end with the English finally triumphing over New Netherland, the Dutch colony along the Hudson River Valley, putting the Puritans in a powerful position.

Yet, the Puritans could barely get along with one another. Their New England Confederation was formed in 1643 to strengthen the military alliances between the Plymouth, Massachusetts Bay, New Haven, and Connecticut colonies in order to defend against Native Americans in the Pequot War, as well as against the the Dutch and the French.

But it was a contentious and short-lived compact, brimming with infighting and power struggles, proving Pilgrims’ intolerance of even their fellow Puritans. “The sense that one had special instructions from God made individuals less amenable to moderation and compromise, or to reason itself,” explained historian Dr. Ned Landsman.

Still, Puritanism was winning big, especially for Massachusetts. It’s legal code and Hebraic ethos was spreading throughout great expenses of the North, while Cavalier culture was simultaneously flourishing in the Southern colonies of Virginia and now Carolina. The seeds of sectional discontent and puritanical progressivism were already being sewn.

Moreover, “The experience of the Puritan colonies in the joint aggression against the Pequots added to the continuing drive of Massachusetts Bay for domination over its neighbors,” wrote economist and historian Dr. Murray N. Rothbard in “Conceived In Liberty.” And this arrogant vision would only continue to grow despite its rootlessness and chaotic nature.

Theocracy unbound

February 1692-May 1693 brought on the the Antinomian Controversy and its subsequent Salem Witch Trials. Pilgrims like Anne Hutchinson believed that the doctrine of predestination offered Christians “Free Grace,” so the rigid enforcement of proper Puritan conduct wasn’t necessary.

“If God has predetermined for me salvation or damnation, how could any behavior of mine change my fate?” she asked. The allegedly anti-authoritarian Church authorities weren’t too keen on such disunity and dissenting views on Puritanism.

The trials took place under the direction of Cotton Mather. Because of the clergy’s dominance in these small, church-centered enclaves that comprised Massachusetts, ministers held the power of arresting people and administering their trials, and Hutchinson found herself banished from the colony.

Then-governor of Massachusetts, Sir William Phips, created the Court of Oyer and Terminer to handle the trials since their was no high court yet in the colony. Only a year before in 1691 had the colony even gotten a renewed charter from William and Mary, creating the Province of Massachusetts. King James II had revoked the colony’s previous royal charter due in large part to Massachusetts’ harsh intolerance of Anglicans.

It wasn’t until Phips’ wife was accused of witchcraft that the legal hysteria ceased, but that wasn’t before about 20 people and two dogs had been executed and some folks like Hutchinson had been cast out from the colony. Some historians claim that the conclusion of these religiously extreme trials marked an end to theocracrtic Puritan rule.

But I would argue that this was just the beginning. Just like the Pharisees, whose influence became only second to that of the Roman governor, the legalistic roots of the Puritans easily transitioned these once God-focused outsiders founding a ‘Christian Israel’ into godless and powerful insiders hellbent on creating an irreligious Promised Land.

More Orwellian than Christian

This once “pure” faith bent to the world, instead of holding it at bay. However, it was precisely the Puritans’ religious asceticism that led them to this place.

They sought Hebraic emulation, yet they were hostile to ritual discipline, and void of tradition and history. Thus, Puritanism was innately defenseless against schism, much less humanism, secularism, and modernity. It was hardwired to fail, but only in a religious sense.

Politically and socially, Puritans came to realize that a progressive heaven on earth could more easily be attained through imposing man’s laws on everyone everywhere, using urgent moralistic talk void of Jesus but done with all the “vile fanatic passion” of Cotton Mather. Totalitarianism and emotion indeed comprise the Northern zeitgeist.

Moralizing busybody. Meddlesome. Irksome. Intolerant. Coercive. Holier than thou. The Yankee was born of such Puritan stock and sensibility. And as Christianity was cast to the periphery of society, the self-righteous Puritan ideals remained internalized within the Yankee people and became embedded in the body politic.

Progressive secularism became their new religion, and resistance is futile, they say. All will convert or submit, or suffer their wrath.

The Pharisees called Jesus a deceiver, a blasphemer, and a friend to the prince of demons. Likewise, anyone who wasn’t (or isn’t) fully in line with their ever-changing but always stringent Puritanical rules might be castigated a witch, sub-human Southern scum, a traitor, or a Nazi. You might even get jailed … or killed.

But hey, you gotta break a few eggs to make a omelet. The ignorant masses need saving after all, and the religious “reformers” and social transformers are up to the task. You might call it dystopian cultural hegemony, but the New England Pharisees call it the “greater good.”

Please stay tuned for part 3 of my Puritan series, “Yankee Sanctification.”

Source: Dissident Mama – Puritans, part 2: New England Pharisees

A Simple Version of Anarcho-Capitalism

Here is how I believe anarcho-capitalism will work:

  • Rights Enforcement Agencies (REA) will provide insurance policies protecting people and their property. If person A harms person B, person B will be reimbursed by his/her REA. Since person B’s REA has now lost money, it can hire a private security firm to force restitution from person A. If person A has an REA, then both REAs can either fight to the death or come to an agreement via arbitration.
    • If they decide to fight to the death, they will lose market share and waste capital. This will result in the growth of market share of peaceful REAs. The only possible exception is in an oligopoly.
    • If they decide to go to arbitration, this will create a common law system as various judges preside over cases between various agencies.
    • Also, keep in mind that most REAs will have reinsurance and most reinsurance companies will issue policies to multiple REAs. There will also likely be REA funds that allow people can own fractional ownership of a basket of REAs. Both of these factors will reduce the likelihood of violent conflict between firms.
  • Either the REAs or reinsurance providers will securitize their insurance policies and sell them on financial markets. Security companies can then buy bundles of these policies, probably grouped by geographic region, and provide free security services to lower the expected payout. This would provide preventative security services so that crimes don’t happen in the first place.
  • A common law system would develop wherein an REA that represents a victim can claim restitution from an REA that that represents an offender, provided it can be proven in court.
    • If a victim does not have an REA, in the spirit of transferrable tortes, he/she can hire an REA to take the case to court, retroactively adding them as a client, at a cost. Most likely the REA will take a large portion of the settlement.
    • If an offender does not have an REA and they are forced to give restitution (or threatened as much), they can make a case against whoever forced them to do so wherein they are the victim.
  • According to the FBI, there were 2,450.7 property crimes per 100,000 in the US in 2016. There were 7,919,035 property crimes total and $15.6 billion in total damages. Therefore, it would cost (2,450.7 / 100,000) * (15.6 billion / 7,919,035) = ~$48 per year for property crime insurance.
  • Also according to the FBI, there were 386.3 violent crimes per 100,000 in the US in 2016. There were 1,248,185 violent crimes total and 1.4 percent of them were murder. According to this seemingly reliable website, the average life insurance policy in the US is for $153,000, so assuming that other violent crimes get a payout at 10% the rate of homicide, it costs ( 386.3 / 100,000) * (.986 * 15,300 + .014 * 153,000) = ~$67 per year for violent crime insurance. Disclaimer: these numbers are on the low end, but even with higher numbers the cost is manageable for even low-income people.
  • Similar systems have existed historically such as in Iceland, Ireland, Somalia, Ghana, and Papua New Guinea to name a few (listed are relevant books that shed light on each respective example if you are interested in learning more — the article linked is written by yours truly).
  • National defense would likely be provided by volunteer militias, as in the case of the Karen State, treaties, as in the case of small nations, and assassination markets (more on this tricky subject in another article).

And that’s all folks. I wrote this off the top of my head while doing back of the napkin calculations so please feel free to give feedback and suggest corrections.

Most of this is taken from the very intelligent people linked in the article, but I think a few insights are my own — although it is more likely that someone has thought of all of this before.

The post A Simple Version of Anarcho-Capitalism appeared first on LJC.IO.

Source: Liam Cardenas – A Simple Version of Anarcho-Capitalism

FPF #132 – 1,000 Days of War

On FPF #132, I discuss the Yemen war at 1,000 days. Iona Craig is now working on a Yemen database revealing key stats about Saudi’s war in Yemen. I explain how US Amb to the UN Nikki Haley is trying to provoke a war with Iran. I talk about the US sharing intelligence with Russia to prevent a terror attack. I also update North Korea, Libya, and Egypt. 

Articles 

  • Saudi Arabia kills ten Yemeni women going to a wedding in an airstrike. [Link]
  • The US and South Korea continue to drill the invasion of North Korea. North Korea sees the drills as a threat and has asked the US to end the drills. [Link] 
  • Senator Lindsey Graham says there is a 30% chance of war with North Korea. [Link] 
  • Italy and the EU will work to strengthen the Libya coast guard to prevent migrants from reaching Europe. [Link]
  • US shares intelligence with Russia that allowed Russia to prevent a terror attack. [Link] 
  • Reza Marashi explains that Nikki Haley is bad at foreign policy. [Link]  
  • Many are expressing skepticism of Nikki Haley’s claim that Iran is supplying missiles to the Houthi. [Link] 
  • James Mattis says there is no reason for the US to step up militarily against Iran. [Link]

Source: Foreign Policy Focus – FPF #132 – 1,000 Days of War

Talking “Dangerous History” with Prof CJ of The Dangerous History Podcast

You’ve been cautioned by the title of this episode.  Just as it says, contained within the next hour and a half of audio is a discussion on the subject of history from a perspective you may not have previously been able to see given the information provided at the time.

In this rather conversational interview, listen as CJ and Trey stumble upon subjects such as Ronald Reagan, George Bush, war and peace, draining the Florida Everglades, and much more.

Related links:

The Moldy Peaches

Punk Rock Opera

Rope River Blues Band

Jordan Peterson, Clean your Room

Where to find The Dangerous History Podcast

Waters of Destiny

Prof CJ’s series on “Draining the Swamp”, a chronicling of the geoengineering project of irrigation networks in the Florida Everglades: Rise of Cane Kingdom Part 1 and Part 2

Nancy and Ronald Reagan statement on the War on Drugs

George Bush, Axis of Evil Speech

Source: Subversion – Talking “Dangerous History” with Prof CJ of The Dangerous History Podcast

Episode 55 – Trading Places (1:33:25)

We discuss yet another Christmas classic from the 80’s, Trading Places, starring Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd in a modern-day (progressive) interpretation of the Prince and the Pauper.

We are joined by Trey Weaver of the Subversion Webcast (the newest member of the Libertarian Union, and all around good guy) to discuss this nature vs. nurture, social engineering, comedy that has perhaps even more relevance today than it did in 1983.

Listen to Trey’s show here at the Libertarian Union and at:

http://www.subversionwebcast.com

Trey on Twitter:  https://twitter.com/intaxic8ed

Continue reading “Episode 55 – Trading Places (1:33:25)”

Conspiracies are Under Selective Pressures

Hindsight and Survivorship Bias in Conspiracy Theory

By Kyle Mamounis of www.nutricrinology.com


The recent (and nearly forgotten) shooting in Las Vegas, complete with shifting story, generated a fresh bout of conspiracy theories. I like conspiracy theories. I believe a good many of them are likely true. The state, after all, is a conspiracy of which libertarians and anarchists theorize.

Spending time on the internet, however, may provide you a supply of conspiracy theories that rapidly outstrips your demand. Conversely, conspiracy theory skeptics present a nauseating level of smugness and dismissal. Those that believe because they want to believe contrasted with those who hold conspiracy theories a priori false.

Henri Poincaré:

“To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.”

Both the naïve believer and the naïve skeptic err, committing Type I and Type II errors through hindsight and survivorship biases.

The error of the conspiracy theorist

The hardcore conspiracy theorist sees all events as tightly orchestrated. Information leaks are intentional, carefully designed to demoralize the public. Whistle blowers confirming only some theories are “controlled opposition.” Visible failures are distractions, to hide a larger coup elsewhere. The unfalsifiable hypotheses set forth by many conspiracy theorists are impenetrable.

What is there to discuss, if both hidden as well as leaked information both serve to confirm total conspiratorial control?

This thinking is reminiscent of Marxist class analysis, whereby a working-class person holding non-Marxist views cannot truly disagree, but is experiencing false consciousness.

The error of the skeptic

The skeptic has an unfalsifiable hypothesis as well. Conspiracies cannot exist, he claims, because someone involved would leak the information, promptly ending the conspiracy. Conspiring state actors would jealously guard incriminating information, never declassifying or releasing documents; therefore any released information disproves the existence of conspiracy. “Debunkers” are heralded, even if only addressing one part, usually the weakest, of a conspiracy theory.

Failures of any kind prove that no cabals exert any meaningful control; the inability to do any one thing serves as proof of the inability to do all things.

The government is too incompetent to efficiently deliver mail, how could it pull off a grand conspiracy?

Continue reading “Conspiracies are Under Selective Pressures”