Where is John Galt?

Where is John Galt? Follow along as we find out!

Monday, March 17, 2014


As the War on Terror appears to be winding down, the Military Industrial Complex we were warned about has found, or manufactured, yet another boogieman for the world to turn its attention to.

In a move strangely reminiscent of the Anschluss in 1938, Vladimir Putin is producing a remarkable restaging of the years leading up to the Second World War, casting himself in the "(Anti-) Hero" role.

An interesting thought though; perhaps what is happening is History rewinding itself. Throughout the Twentieth Century, a wave of progressive-socialism has overtaken countries. In some like Germany and Italy, it was a bloody coup overthrowing the more conservative government forces, in other places like France and England it was a reactionary adjustment to the chaos of the time by imposing more and stricter Government controls on the people. In every case though, the Government forces ripped personal freedoms from the people "for their own good".

Perhaps, what we are seeing is a "Historic Backlash" like a rubber band pulled taught, History is snapping back to a time before the Progressive-Socialists seized power. The negative side to this is that the Twentieth Century was arguably one of the deadliest and most destructive times in human history. On the plus side it would mean a more free and independent future, at least until the mind control forces of Socialism attempt to regulate our freedoms away again.

What I hope is that this Science Fiction Rewind doesn't happen. I would hate to live through the cold war again, I'm sure my parents generation would rather pass on a retelling of Vietnam and Korea, and I have no doubt that the survivors of the World Wars could happily do without that horror show again. This time let us learn from History, appeasement does not work.

Never in History has a bully stopped their abusive behavior due to the wagged fingers of the people they were abusing. Thugs understand only power, the power they wield, and the power used against them. Hitler would not have stopped, had the Allied Nations not forced him to. Napoleon would have happily marched across the length and breadth of Europe and into Russia, but for Waterloo and the thousands that gave their lives both before and after. We attempted a bargain with the Devil in 1938, when Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace for our time" after meeting with Hitler and getting his solemn promise that he would not invade anyone. Little did Chamberlain know, at the time that Hitler's promise was only as strong as the Army that stood against him.

Let us try not to make the same stupid mistake this time with Putin...

Thursday, March 13, 2014


Americans have fiercely defended the promise of freedom for centuries. We fought our Revolution to gain our freedom, the Civil war to retain our freedom and recently (although controversially) to ensure others are allowed their freedom. However, since just before my lifetime, we have begun to remove some of our own basic freedoms.

Recently, was the case of Bakers that refused to produce wedding cakes for Gay couples because it violated their Christian beliefs. When did a person's belief and right to refuse service become the Governments business? Well, it looks to me that the erosion of freedom started, as is often the case, with the best of intentions, and has simply grown to encompass personal choices. When Rosa Parks sat on that bus all those years ago, she had every right to expect to keep her seat; she was on a public, city bus. If on the other hand she had been in a gypsy cab, a privately owned conveyance, the driver would have been well within his right to refuse to transport her, not after she paid her fare, but before. What was supposed to ensure equality in the public sector has now moved into the private sector where it has no right to exist.

I work for a major multinational corporation, a private company that has decided that they would not discriminate in any of their practices. My company believes that all people are equal, not because it is a moral thing to do, but because it makes the best financial sense. No law or regulation could work more effectively to remove barriers than the bottom line for a corporation dedicated to making a profit for its shareholders.

For the Government to force compliance of equality laws meant to provide access to public services on private business removes the private freedom to succeed or fail. My company could not long compete by discriminating against even one small minority, regardless of how minute their market share is. Any law that forces private citizens to operate against their own self-interest is, in my opinion a bad law and should be removed or at the very least ignored. By forcing association, these laws breed resentment, resentment that would have naturally dissipated as companies that continued to discriminate are forced out of the marketplace by free competition.

What we have now though does not dissipate resentment, but actively breeds it. When a person or entity forces a free individual to provide a service that they feel is against their interest they will resent the person, or entity forcing the action, an action that is now little more than slavery regardless of how well or poorly compensated.

What would allow maximum freedom would be a free market, if you choose not to accept my business, I will simply do without your product, or find another provider. Nothing is so rare or precious that it should require the force of the State to ensure your right to a product or service forcibly compelled from another person. At best, all the State can compel is obedience it cannot compel competence. What you will receive will be shoddy and second rate.

I would rather provide my money to an incompetent pretender joyfully providing their best work, than to a skilled artisan providing minimum effort to comply with the Governments edict.

Of course, as always, the choice is yours...

Intense Debate Comments