2030 zal het klimaat weinig tot niets helpen

Per 2030 wordt de verkoop van auto’s met interne verbrandingsmotor per oekaze verboden. Even daargelaten dat dit een vorm van reisverbod en dus werkverbod is, zal de vermeende doelstelling (redding van het klimaat) ook niet gehaald worden, want burgers zullen op zoek gaan naar andere manieren om naar hun werk/familie/… te kunnen reizen. Een eeuwenoude beproefde methode is het paard. Deze kunnen bereden worden, of voor een wagen gespannen worden. Bovendien laten paarden scheten van methaan, volgens sommige activisten een veel sterker broeikasgas dan CO2, dus het aantal paarden dat er ingezet gaan worden als vervanger van auto’s, stoten zoveel methaan uit (dat ook nog eens stukken sterker is dan CO2), dat het sommetje weinig hoopgevend wordt: de hoeveelheid extra methaan maal de grotere kracht van methaan compenseert de verlaging van CO2 aanzienlijk.
En zal ook nog leiden tot meer dierenleed.
Fijn; dank, Haagse junta!


The real stuff

On anarchist fora, it’s common to witness infighting between anarcho-communists and anarcho-capitalists. The former (ancoms) maintain that their version of anarchism is the only “real” anarchism, because ancapism (anarchocapitalism) allows hierarchies due to private ownership of goods, the means of production (MOP), and thus permitting employer/employee relationships.
Anarchy comes from the Greek “an archos” meaning “without ruler” and is refined by ancaps as “without coercive ruler”, because under ancapism it is very much possible to switch jobs, or live on the streets. In a free society, expect more consideration with the needy, through both charity and fraternity.

It is quite difficult to escape the (totalitarian) state. In communist open-air prisons (states) it was even nearly impossible, thanks to armed border guards killing people trying to get out.


It’s when things take a historical turn, that it gets truly hilarious. With communists getting upset and claiming that Soviet communism wasn’t “real” communism, but merely an intermediary form, to be abandoned when the global revolution was complete, and the entire world was communist.
Such self-delusion. As if the bloody emperors would be willing to relinquish that delightful power once they had won dominion over the entire world.


Capitalism has had its very unpleasant moments, but in “true” capitalism, life would be better than it is now.
Because the state gets in the way, by continually propping up rightfully failing businesses, passing legislation that benefits lobbying businesses and harms the people, that didn’t unite and hire lobbyists themselves. They already pay for lobbyists, ones tgat call themselves “representatives” and get swayed by lobbyists for the other team. In real capitalism (free market economy), the people have actual, direct say in their economic future.
The kind of capitalism we have nowadays, is better called corporatism. Because corporations hire lobbyists to influence legislators (see above) the people have no influence at all. They already have zero influence on legislators as it is and then the scant hope that some legislators might sometimes work on the people’s behalf gets squashed by lobbyists.
One of the things that the people don’t have any influence on, is the socalism of the legislators, the entire parliament is left wing, aka socialist, including the so-called “right-wing” parties. (That’s why there is no real capitalism here, in any sense) an unassailable problem with voting is, the people can only vote for politicians.
Just imagine a parliamentarian trying to break trough with deviant views on policy. He’ll first have to rise through the ranks to win a place on the ballot, then hope the party as a whole wins enough votes so that he can lift along into the parliament. Once there, he can’t differentiate himself with a deviant voting record, because the votes of individual MPs aren’t tracked, only percentages of the so-called “chamber-fractions” of every party. So when he goes against the official line too often, he gets kicked out of parliament in favor of a more obedient sort.
While true that voters can tick the boxes of specific persons on the ballot, voters can’t find a reason to vote for any specific person, because their voting record is not available. And MPs are unikely to boast that they voted agaibst a particular law, because that may lead to them being wiped off the ballot.
And that is why state capitalism is undesirable (yet more preferable than state communism, the only form communism can ever take), and so ancapism is the way to go.

Because apparently, even in political elections, there is no free market.

Free press: #MSM


When John McCain recently referenced Trump by saying that “the first thing dictators do is shut down the press,” and George Bush remarked that Trump is “not willing” to have a free press, the thing it tells you is how tragically out of touch personalities residing outside of the progressive consciousness are.

Indeed, the shut down of the press by dictators has played a harmful role. But the shutdown has occurred in a very Alinskyite fashion (slowly and not overtly volent) and continues to do so. It’s what’s commonly referred to as the MainStream Media, or #MSM. And it’s what the press have covertly done to themselves, without overt action by a despot (tge prees have sided with/become a dictator in its own right).

In fact, when during democratic elections an aspiring despot complains about (calls out) the fake news certain outlets espouse while mis-reporting (if mentioning at all) real news, the goodie-goodies (useful idiots) are all over him.

(example: “#Russia influenced the election campaign!” Yet it has been proven beyond any whiff of a doubt that the e-mails were not stolen over the internet; but rather copied to a local thumb drive, and by a presumably particularly patriotic member of HRC’s own campaign team, at that; so, unless HRC hired #Russians to help with the campaign for the #American presidential elections, the claim that the Russians were behind it holds absolutely zero credibility, yet is what the MSM keep saying).
Has any news outlet ever even considered mentioning the practice of so-called #RegimeChange? Which, of course, is the regular American practice of killing off unfashionable dictators and replacing them with new ones (Saddam was very fashionable for a while, so the imperial machine supported him both financially and operationally) That is worse by several degrees, than Russia spending a few hundred thousand dollars on Facebook ads to influence an election.


Forgive the conspiratorial tone, please look beyond that and read my arguments.

Politics is overreaching, it is getting over excited:.
But people are getting tired of being afraid:

  • Afraid of the Soviets
  • Afraid of Climate change
  • Afraid of Muslims
  • Afraid of the Russians so-called meddling with the presidential election of 2016

(The latter is demonstrably false: there is definitive evidence that the emails were not copied over the internet, but to a thumb drive; so it was a simple inside job; unless Clinton’s campaign hired Russian operatives, it was no,more than a patriotic act by an American employee scared of the prospect that something as malicious and manipulative as HRC would gain control of the nuclear arsenal)

Social contract – a refutation

Having written about the social contract before: https://ludwigvanel.wordpress.com/2017/09/17/social-contract/
And like to revisit the concept: contracts are between multiple parties (at least two): since the social contract is supposed to be between the population and the government, the contract is null and void. Because one of the parties has forsaken its obligations:
The people aren’t safe from the government which keeps starting wars that kill their children on the battlefield and provoke retalliation like 9/11, #Brussels etc; the war over drugs (caused by the ban on drugs)
Taxation without representation
Imprisoning people for victimless crimes (drugs again)
Or for not letting themselves get stolen from
Causing max CO2 emissions while taxing (and blaming) the people over CO2 emissions.

“Om particulieren te beschermen”

… moet de ECB worden ingetoomd, want dat tuig is bezig de economie naar het slachtblok te leiden.
De cryptomunten zij juist bedacht om het volk te redden van de staatsmunt, welke al zo’n ravage hebben aangericht:
in het oude Rome,
Duitsland na WO1,
De Amerikaanse grote depressie,
Griekenland na de terreuro,
(de rest van Europa valt vanzelf nog),
Venezuela, waar de junta de officiële munt zelfsverschillende ruiltarieven heeft gegeven: eentje voor de burgers, eentje voor de oliehandel door de staat en ik geloof zelfs nog een derde. De burgers handelen onderling in BitCoins, omdat die munt betrouwbaarder is dan de staat.
Daarom hoop ik dat winkels binenkort zich ook gaan laten betalen met crypto’s, danwel in baar goud of zo, zodat de burger alvast kan wennen.

הפרד ומשולהפרד ומשול, فرق تسد

The title reads divide et impera (divide and conquer) in both Hebrew and Arabic, indicating my point that, to (some) western conquerors (politicians), the muslims of today are the jews of 70 years ago; easily blamed for every loose nut and bolt.


They only serve the political purposes of opportunistic politicians, that abuse their existence to gain power (both as in seats in parliament and in passing convenient laws that restrict the natural rights of citizens) over their backs. For instance, one Dutch power-horney MP has invented the concept of islamisation (the ongoing replacement of Dutch ttraditional culture by an Islamic one, or: encroachment of Islamic culture onto the traditional Dutch culture). The only manner in can be said to occur, is not through malicious intent of muslims (voters for this Geert Wilders guy, like to bolster this claim by pointing to the more political phrases in the coran; claiming that they clearly wish to conquer the whole world either militarily orby immigration, or by – forced – conversion) but, rather, this is the result of “forced” immigration of Arabs.

Divida et imperia in the low countries

The left enjoys disrupting perfectly smoothly operating societies, because divide and conquer works so well for the political apparstus. In fact, they like to get their votes from immigrant populations that ought to know better than to vote for people that transparently set entire segments of the popuoation up against eachother. By crying racism any chance they get, even when an incident is clearly the fault of an immigrant, then also pointing the finger at the caucasian native. Inspiring resentment of immigrants among the caucasian natives.

Free stuff

Another beloved practice of theirs is: to forcibly distribute scarce resources among immigrants; e.g. prividing them with free health care, free housing (have I already mentioned the housing shortage since 1946?), all at the cost of natives that have been grumbling about this for decades, but (in the finest Dutch political tradition) were kicked in the teeth by the ruling caste for that; the left simply enjoys “redistributing”. As in they like to organize society to their liking.
This results in short-sighted aversion (hatred is a big word, but getting more and more appropriate here) against immigrants.
Who are only guilty of getting lured by the free goodies – can you blame them?


And then making the mistake of voting for the most hostile and opportunistic of all politicians; left wingers (and that’s saying something). Making them disliked by native voters, that feel victimized by the left (and, as proven by the constant theft, rightly so!) and therefore try their best to vote against the left.


Or so they think. In reality, Geert Wilders (PVV) is a very left wing politician hinself, wishing to transfer ever more power ronbthe population to its rightful home: politics.
So voters try their hardest to diminish the left (well, some of them do) by voting “against” them, for the PVV. And Wilders himself blatantly tries to go nazi-style on muslims, trearting them like jews were treated in the 1930s; blamed for every ill under the sun, made out to be intellectually, culturally and morally under-developed, as compared to natives. Thus stirring the nationalist pot, blaming the big, weak EU-borders, and hoping to wheen The Netherlands away fron the failed European project. In itself, a noble goal, bykut trying to turn the Netherlands into a private fiefdom, sounds ominous.