Sunday, September 22, 2019
THE WAY FORWARD?
Everyone educated before 1960 or so knows how the United States was formed and the design of government which the founders followed. They were intent on founding a democratic representative constitutional republic.
There were flaws in the founding to be sure. They had an unwarranted commitment to unity. So much so was this the case that they sacrificed the natural rights of man (slaves) to their vision of unity. Anyone who knows anything at all about values knows that unity and diversity are both subordinate and not absolute values. The second problem in the founding was expressed in the early and extensive speech by Luther Martin. He argued persuasively that the lower body of the legislature in its proportional representation constituted a surrender of sovereignty by the states. He was right. Had I been there I would on these points have walked out of the convention with him and not returned. Madison's deprecating remarks about Luther Martin were probably one of the earliest examples of the resort to ad hominem in American political history when substantive counter points were outside his intellectual reach.
Nevertheless, the Constitution was ratified by the states and it has been downhill ever since. One of the early egregious moves occurred in Marbury v. Madison to which we may attribute the beginning of judicial supremacy. For those looking for a modern example of judicial supremacy they may find it in any edition of any major paper running an article on Iran. Iran is an example of judicial supremacy. In judicial supremacy law really does not matter at all. It is belief that is of the greatest importance. In recent times the power of belief has been reflected in one quite astonishing ruling of the Supreme Court. The ruling that carbon dioxide is a pollutant in our atmosphere represents the triumph of ignorance in our society and exposes the environmental movement as nothing more than an apocalyptic religious cult.
Later in the history of the country came the rise of the administrative state and a host of bad Supreme Court decisions especially arising from the expansive use of the commerce clause.
The belief system that accompanied the formation of the administrative state was an acceptance of the Hegelian historical dialectic produced by Fichte and put into practice by Hegel. There was also their radical repudiation of the value of the individual continued by Feuerbach. The anthropology in the ideas of the German idealists was that man was a perfectible being who perfected himself in the historical process through conflict, violence, and punishment. The German idealists were rationalists like Joe Biden who ‘chose truth over facts'. So to them it was no matter of concern that man had not perfected himself in the past five thousand years of recorded history and therefore unlikely that he would perfect himself in either the near or remote future. They believed that the fundamental existential truth of the universe was the punishment of man into submission. It was a sort of science fiction Borgian view: 'you must submit, you must comply, and resistance is futile'.
Other aspects of the 'slouch toward Gomorrah' made the situation even worse. The net result of all this is that our current form of government is a tutelary fascist patriarchy of judicial supremacy. Some might ask, 'fascism'? Vast segments of the modern economy are owned or controlled by the State. For instance, healthcare, retirement plans, transportation, land use, education, and energy production are all highly regulated by government. Some might ask, 'patriarchy'? It is a common view among many politicians of the left to view their constituents as children who need to be led, fed, housed, clothed, and most of all punished. They tend to see all levels of government from local to federal as acting in loco parentis. One must remember that Barak Obama announced to an audience as he campaigned for reelection in 2012, 'we are going to punish our enemies and reward our friends'.
In stark contrast to the German idealists and their modern day acolytes the founders did not uncritically accept the notion of the perfectibility of man. They saw man as deeply flawed and frequently exploiting the weaknesses of others in naked self-aggrandizement. The solution to this flawed character was the separation of powers. The most egregious behaviors of man in society were to be controlled by the 'chains of the constitution'. Unlike the German idealists the founders were not rationalists but rather were empiricists. They were followers of John Locke and undoubtedly had a thorough understanding of his great empirical work in which he asserted, 'there is nothing in the mind that is not first in the senses'. Even in the later Federalist papers Hamilton asserted that the 'least fallible' source of all human knowledge and understanding is personal experience. As I heard my late father (who was an industrial mechanical engineer) say on many occasions, 'a single test is worth a thousand expert opinions'.
The question then comes, what is our exit strategy and what is the way forward for us to a rebirth of liberty? I do not know the answer to this question. Several ideas come to mind. An elimination of sovereign immunity would help. Reform of libel laws would help. Deconstructing the administrative state would be imperative. There would of necessity be a new recognition that the administrative state itself is a violation of the constitution which vests all legislative power in the House of Representatives and the Senate. A balanced budget and a line item veto would help, and so forth.
Proposals to move forward with an Article 5 convention have been made. The problem with all of these approaches is that since the political class does not obey the current constitution significant doubt remains whether they would obey either a new constitution or new amendments.
The founders accepted the idea of natural law. This was the idea that without regard to any Holy Scripture, the universe as it exists bears moral content. Jefferson says as much when he refers to self-evident truth. The first principle of natural law, the 'unmoved mover' of natural law to which all other asserted aspects of natural law must be subordinate is the inestimable value of every individual. The claim 'all men are created equal' is nothing more than the assertion that none of us is endowed with a right to dominion and none are endowed with an obligation of servitude.
The founders rejected the idea that the fundamental existential truth of the universe is the punishment of man into submission. They asserted natural law demonstrating that all forms of government must arise from the religious disposition of man. However any person defined God they believed that the fundamental existential truth of the universe was the grace of God triumphant in the affairs of men. Grace and moral suasion were to replace punishment and compulsion. This was the greatness of the American idea and it was exceptional.
Modern man does not believe in natural law. The center of gravity today in American Society is existentialism. In this view each of us creates our own values as we wrestle with the exigencies and vicissitudes of our lives. All of these constructed value systems are morally equivalent. This has produced an atmosphere of moral relativism and multiculturalism. Further, as one walks away from natural law, one loses any basis for universal human rights and returns to the barbarism of tribalism.
Another aspect of humanity militating against a rebirth of liberty is psychological. Even a cursory examination of tyranny in history reveals a widespread insatiable desire in despots for the accumulation and expansion of power. The drive for domination over others who must submit is quite striking. It is almost certain that this unquenchable desire to exercise dominion over others, to direct their lives, and to manipulate their persons is related to domination and submission in sadomasochism. It can reasonably be argued that modern statism is advocated by persons who have a socio-sexual personality disorder. Most likely this disorder can only be treated through extensive group therapy. It is, however, to be noted that sexual disorders are the most difficult to successfully treat and seldom result in the recovery of the individual.
There must be a recovery of the moral center of man in our society. I do not know how to address this complex problem. But this I do know: the answer will not be found in any text written by Immanuel Kant.
Tuesday, August 13, 2019
Reparations For Slavery
Every rabid political season there emerges a new demand from some quarters for reparations for slavery. This demand is never accompanied by a discussion of who should pay the reparations or a discussion of who should receive such reparations. At least half of these issues should not be a matter of any debate. The states which approved of the Constitution and their dates of ratification are as follows:
These states should send representatives to meet on the issue and resolve it one way or the other. Reparations paid by third parties would not be acceptable in the traditions and laws of western jurisprudence.
If it easy to resolve who should pay reparations, it is much more difficult to determine who should receive reparations.
- Delaware - December 7, 1787
- Pennsylvania - December 12, 1787
- New Jersey - December 18, 1787
- Georgia - January 2, 1788
- Connecticut - January 9, 1788
- Massachusetts - February 6, 1788
- Maryland - April 28, 1788
- South Carolina - May 23, 1788
- New Hampshire - June 21, 1788
- Virginia - June 25, 1788
- New York - July 26, 1788
- North Carolina - November 21, 1789
- Rhode Island - May 29, 1790
These states should send representatives to meet on the issue and resolve it one way or the other. Reparations paid by third parties would not be acceptable in the traditions and laws of western jurisprudence.
If it easy to resolve who should pay reparations, it is much more difficult to determine who should receive reparations.
Wednesday, August 7, 2019
Inside the Mind of the Mass Murderer
The murderers of individuals are motivated by a relatively small number of factors. The murder of an individual can be motivated by money, jealousy, or hatred. Individuals are almost always murdered by one of their acquaintances or family members. Some individuals are murdered as a result of illegal substance deals in which one or more parties feels cheated. Legal commercial deals in which one or more parties feel cheated can be and are regularly resolved by civil law. One cannot make recourse to civil law to settle disputes over illegal transactions. There is a high degree of specificity in these crimes which is usually discovered by thorough investigations.
But what motivates the mass murderer? There are specific characteristics associated with many mass murders. There is often a history of physical or emotional abuse. There is often a history of the use of addictive substances. Mass murderers are often social outsiders not adept at social interactions. They may have a deep sense of isolation. The may have a racial, religious, or ethnic predjudice. But with all of these factors, what do these mass murderers have in common?
This issue has not generally been discussed for a number of reasons. An investigation of this issue will certainly make many uncomfortable, and cause many to abandon the inquiry. The mass murderer invariably believes that his acts are in his own self interest as they represent an improvement in his humanity. He sees himself on a journey of self improvement which is advanced by the murder of his victims. His acts are points along the way to his certain perfection. He sees his acts as reaching beyond himself and perfecting society as a whole, even if and especially if his acts end in his own martydom. The implicit religious belief in the mass murderer is the belief in the perfectibility of man... among whom he sees himself as an outstanding example.
These are the same elements which are present with Islamo-fascist mass murderers. Man is a perfectible being who can only be improved through conflict, punishment, or death. Honor killings are efforts to reestablish the 'honor' of the family by eliminating whoever has damaged that honor.
It is all about the perfectibility of man. The attackers of the World Trade Center took the view that they were providing the west with a valuable spiritual service and probably expected the proper response of the west would be gratitude.
It is the dubious belief in the perfectibility of man that drive all of this violent anti-social behavior.
Until this aspect is widely recognized it will be impossible to develop a proactive response.
But what motivates the mass murderer? There are specific characteristics associated with many mass murders. There is often a history of physical or emotional abuse. There is often a history of the use of addictive substances. Mass murderers are often social outsiders not adept at social interactions. They may have a deep sense of isolation. The may have a racial, religious, or ethnic predjudice. But with all of these factors, what do these mass murderers have in common?
This issue has not generally been discussed for a number of reasons. An investigation of this issue will certainly make many uncomfortable, and cause many to abandon the inquiry. The mass murderer invariably believes that his acts are in his own self interest as they represent an improvement in his humanity. He sees himself on a journey of self improvement which is advanced by the murder of his victims. His acts are points along the way to his certain perfection. He sees his acts as reaching beyond himself and perfecting society as a whole, even if and especially if his acts end in his own martydom. The implicit religious belief in the mass murderer is the belief in the perfectibility of man... among whom he sees himself as an outstanding example.
These are the same elements which are present with Islamo-fascist mass murderers. Man is a perfectible being who can only be improved through conflict, punishment, or death. Honor killings are efforts to reestablish the 'honor' of the family by eliminating whoever has damaged that honor.
It is all about the perfectibility of man. The attackers of the World Trade Center took the view that they were providing the west with a valuable spiritual service and probably expected the proper response of the west would be gratitude.
It is the dubious belief in the perfectibility of man that drive all of this violent anti-social behavior.
Until this aspect is widely recognized it will be impossible to develop a proactive response.
Monday, July 29, 2019
The Iranian Theocracy and the Inevitable Future
For the longest time American politicians have believed that they could negotiate with the Iranian theocrats and convince them to join with civilized nations in productive relationships. This reflects a hopelessly naive understanding of the world and life view of the Mullahs. In order to understand where the relationship with Iran is going one must examine the fundamentals of Shiite Islam.
In the first instance, Shiite Islam rejects all notions of natural law. This means that they reject the idea that universe as it exists bears moral content. Without a notion that the universe bears moral content there is no foundation for universal human rights. For the Shiites, tribalism is not something they accidentally back into in the same manner that western leftists back into tribalism by subscribing to group identity politics. For Shiites, tribalism is at the core of their belief.
Shiites do not believe that all men are created equal....that none are endowed with a right to dominion and none are endowed with an obligation of servitude. They are supremacists. They believe they are endowed with a right to dominion and all others are endowed with an obligation of servitude.
In the matter of eschatology greater difficulty arises. Shiites believe that they are under moral obligation to usher in the end of days. They see all efforts in this direction as man perfecting himself within history.
On account of these aspects of religious belief they will not be dissuaded from building nuclear devices. Further, they will not be dissuaded from using those devices. They cannot be bribed to give this up. They will build a bomb and they will use it. They see this as their moral obligation.
So the only question which remains is the issue of where they will use it first. The most likely first use of these weapons will not be against Israel or the United States. The most likely first use of these weapons will be against Saudi Arabia. They will gamble that Israel and the United States as well as others will temporize and do nothing if the weapons are used against Saude Arabia. They are probably right.
In the first instance, Shiite Islam rejects all notions of natural law. This means that they reject the idea that universe as it exists bears moral content. Without a notion that the universe bears moral content there is no foundation for universal human rights. For the Shiites, tribalism is not something they accidentally back into in the same manner that western leftists back into tribalism by subscribing to group identity politics. For Shiites, tribalism is at the core of their belief.
Shiites do not believe that all men are created equal....that none are endowed with a right to dominion and none are endowed with an obligation of servitude. They are supremacists. They believe they are endowed with a right to dominion and all others are endowed with an obligation of servitude.
In the matter of eschatology greater difficulty arises. Shiites believe that they are under moral obligation to usher in the end of days. They see all efforts in this direction as man perfecting himself within history.
On account of these aspects of religious belief they will not be dissuaded from building nuclear devices. Further, they will not be dissuaded from using those devices. They cannot be bribed to give this up. They will build a bomb and they will use it. They see this as their moral obligation.
So the only question which remains is the issue of where they will use it first. The most likely first use of these weapons will not be against Israel or the United States. The most likely first use of these weapons will be against Saudi Arabia. They will gamble that Israel and the United States as well as others will temporize and do nothing if the weapons are used against Saude Arabia. They are probably right.
Friday, July 19, 2019
BEFORE TRUMP
Before the stunning victory of Donald Trump in 2016 there existed in the United States among almost all senior elected officials a common understanding of the American people and the role of the United States in world affairs.
The American people were seen as incompetent, ignorant boobs who needed to be led, fed, housed, cleansed, transformed, and most of all punished by the enlightened few occupying the most important offices of government. Since the close of the second world war the American taxpayer was envisioned by both political parties as Atlas holding the planet on his shoulders and bringing civilization to everyone everywhere who previously lived in a cave and wore a loincloth.
In matters of trade this meant accepting the ideas of Philip Dru administrator endorsing one way free trade and a steeply graduated income tax. But as it turns out, one test is worth a thousand expert opinions, and with the passage of time Americans came to see exactly how fatuous these ideas were.
What eventuated was a export of major sectors of the American manufacturing base. The policies effectively turned the United States into a colony of all of the rest of the nations of the earth. The United States exported its manufacturing base, raw materials, and commodities. It imported manufactured products, low wages, and excess populations of foreign countries.
Trump was elected and immediately set about reversing these historic trends. For many years Republicans and Democrats had assured Americans that their manufacturing jobs were gone for good and were never coming back and it was time to get retrained to flip burgers at Hardee's. But after only two years in office Trump had shown that the standard bromides of Republicans and Democrats were nothing more than vicious lies. The success which he has had on economic matters virtually assure his reelection.
It has been my long experience that nothing engenders more resentment and hatred than dramatic success in large swaths of the public wed to envy and greed. Thus, it is in my view that the life of Donald Trump is in real jeaparody from the crazed left, Islamo-fascists, mainline Democrats, and RINO Republicans. For the vast center of the American public however, many can not remember ever being so respected by the leader of the country.
The American people were seen as incompetent, ignorant boobs who needed to be led, fed, housed, cleansed, transformed, and most of all punished by the enlightened few occupying the most important offices of government. Since the close of the second world war the American taxpayer was envisioned by both political parties as Atlas holding the planet on his shoulders and bringing civilization to everyone everywhere who previously lived in a cave and wore a loincloth.
In matters of trade this meant accepting the ideas of Philip Dru administrator endorsing one way free trade and a steeply graduated income tax. But as it turns out, one test is worth a thousand expert opinions, and with the passage of time Americans came to see exactly how fatuous these ideas were.
What eventuated was a export of major sectors of the American manufacturing base. The policies effectively turned the United States into a colony of all of the rest of the nations of the earth. The United States exported its manufacturing base, raw materials, and commodities. It imported manufactured products, low wages, and excess populations of foreign countries.
Trump was elected and immediately set about reversing these historic trends. For many years Republicans and Democrats had assured Americans that their manufacturing jobs were gone for good and were never coming back and it was time to get retrained to flip burgers at Hardee's. But after only two years in office Trump had shown that the standard bromides of Republicans and Democrats were nothing more than vicious lies. The success which he has had on economic matters virtually assure his reelection.
It has been my long experience that nothing engenders more resentment and hatred than dramatic success in large swaths of the public wed to envy and greed. Thus, it is in my view that the life of Donald Trump is in real jeaparody from the crazed left, Islamo-fascists, mainline Democrats, and RINO Republicans. For the vast center of the American public however, many can not remember ever being so respected by the leader of the country.
Tuesday, July 16, 2019
Thiel, Google, and Treason
On the evening of 7/15/2019 the co-founder of Facebook Peter Thiel alleged that while Google had refused to partner with the US military on the development of Artificial Intelligence, it was nevertheless moving forward with providing that technology to the Red Chinese army. Thiel dared to suggest that this move might be considered treason and urged the FBI and CIA to investigate. Of course the possibility that Google would walk a tight line nearing treason comes as no surprise to the average intelligent US adult. Many of my acquaintances no longer use the word google as a verb. Instead they use the word goebbels as a verb.
Tuesday, June 25, 2019
Tutelary Fascist Patriarchy of Judicial Supremacy
There is no doubt or dispute among historians that the United States of American was founded as a republic and not as any despotic form of government at all. The Constitution as designed was a document of enumerated powers and not a document of enumerated rights. The branches of government were designed to be separate but equal with no branch holding supremacy over the other two.
The founders were deeply impressed by the work of John Locke and understood his two treatises as presenting the two basic ideas behind governance. One could either have some form of patriarchy or one could assert as a self evident truth that no person is endowed with a right of dominion over others and no person is endowed with an obligation of servitude to others.
With however, the passage of time and the ever swelling hubris of the political class the despotism of tutelary fascist patriarchy of judicial supremacy has reemerged to impose relentless punishments on the hapless citizen. The leadership in the movement has undoubtedly come from the federal level, but has also been followed in many of the several states. Who will deliver us from this tyranny?
Who will save us from the government employee or judge arriving on the door step to announce that he or she has arrived to 'help' us. Whence comes this dubious belief that the poor individual ignorant citizen must be punished into submission for his own good?
In recent years the notion of individual district federal judges imposing nationwide injunctions is antithetical to every notion of liberty that has ever been contemplated. To some these will seem wild and baseless statements. But this pattern of governance reaches from the highest offices in the land all the way down to local traffic enforcement with local governments using fines not to punish truly criminal behavior, but merely to pad local budgets. My concern is for the future of the country and for our posterity who will eventually hang from meat hooks to receive beatings with rubber hoses.
The founders were deeply impressed by the work of John Locke and understood his two treatises as presenting the two basic ideas behind governance. One could either have some form of patriarchy or one could assert as a self evident truth that no person is endowed with a right of dominion over others and no person is endowed with an obligation of servitude to others.
With however, the passage of time and the ever swelling hubris of the political class the despotism of tutelary fascist patriarchy of judicial supremacy has reemerged to impose relentless punishments on the hapless citizen. The leadership in the movement has undoubtedly come from the federal level, but has also been followed in many of the several states. Who will deliver us from this tyranny?
Who will save us from the government employee or judge arriving on the door step to announce that he or she has arrived to 'help' us. Whence comes this dubious belief that the poor individual ignorant citizen must be punished into submission for his own good?
In recent years the notion of individual district federal judges imposing nationwide injunctions is antithetical to every notion of liberty that has ever been contemplated. To some these will seem wild and baseless statements. But this pattern of governance reaches from the highest offices in the land all the way down to local traffic enforcement with local governments using fines not to punish truly criminal behavior, but merely to pad local budgets. My concern is for the future of the country and for our posterity who will eventually hang from meat hooks to receive beatings with rubber hoses.
Friday, April 5, 2019
The Smear Merchants and the Demand for Trump's Tax Returns
The emerging demand for the release of Trump's tax return has an actual unspoken agenda. In the first instance everyone knows, or should know, that the Democrats in congress already have Trump's tax returns. It was only a short time ago that it was revealed that the Obama administration had a program of wholesale violations of first amendment rights of American citizens.
It was Lois Lerner et. al. that slow walked or denied applications for tax free foundations and other conservative organizations. When questioned before Congressional committees on the issue, the felonious acts were so egregious and numerous that she was compelled by her own guilt to plead the fifth amendment. Since there was no effort when she was employed by the Internal Revenue Service to scrupulously obey the law, it is fatuous to assume that any other law would be obeyed.
The natural conclusion of this line of reasoning is that the Democrats already have Trump's tax returns and are merely demanding the formal release of such information so as to not expose employees of the Internal Revenue Service to further criminal liability. They must already have returns for all eight years of the Obama administration. Why then, do they want the returns out in the open? They want to reveal specific information to public scrutiny that Trump and many others would prefer remain private.
The most reasonable conclusion of this line of reasoning is that they want to expose all private tax exempt organizations that have been recipients of donations from Trump over many years. They want to smear and besmirch those organizations regardless of what they do in an effort to destroy them. It is about smearing everybody who is anybody who ever had anything to do with Donald Trump.
At the end of the day this mob of fascists will undoubtedly get their way, and none of us can predict how many worthwhile organizations will be destroyed. Who will be on the list? Hospitals?
Colleges, Educational Foundations...? Whoever they are they will be pilloried without mercy for accepting money from Trump. It is after all not likely that Trump would have attempted to reduce his tax bite by writing off the donation of his used underwear as was done by Bill and Hillary Clinton.
It was Lois Lerner et. al. that slow walked or denied applications for tax free foundations and other conservative organizations. When questioned before Congressional committees on the issue, the felonious acts were so egregious and numerous that she was compelled by her own guilt to plead the fifth amendment. Since there was no effort when she was employed by the Internal Revenue Service to scrupulously obey the law, it is fatuous to assume that any other law would be obeyed.
The natural conclusion of this line of reasoning is that the Democrats already have Trump's tax returns and are merely demanding the formal release of such information so as to not expose employees of the Internal Revenue Service to further criminal liability. They must already have returns for all eight years of the Obama administration. Why then, do they want the returns out in the open? They want to reveal specific information to public scrutiny that Trump and many others would prefer remain private.
The most reasonable conclusion of this line of reasoning is that they want to expose all private tax exempt organizations that have been recipients of donations from Trump over many years. They want to smear and besmirch those organizations regardless of what they do in an effort to destroy them. It is about smearing everybody who is anybody who ever had anything to do with Donald Trump.
At the end of the day this mob of fascists will undoubtedly get their way, and none of us can predict how many worthwhile organizations will be destroyed. Who will be on the list? Hospitals?
Colleges, Educational Foundations...? Whoever they are they will be pilloried without mercy for accepting money from Trump. It is after all not likely that Trump would have attempted to reduce his tax bite by writing off the donation of his used underwear as was done by Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Tuesday, March 19, 2019
The Tutelary Fascist Party and Christophobia
The Tutelary Fascist Party (aka the Democrat Party) now supports several policies each of which will raise opposition among a variety of single issue voters. These positions include:
1. infanticide
2. a command economy
3. antisemitism
4. elimination of the 2nd amendment and seizure of all firearms
5. elimination of the 1st amendment
6. elimination of the presumption of innocence in American jurisprudence
7. elimination of all air travel
8. elimination of all internal combustion engines
9. elimination of the consumption of all fossil fuels
10. doubling the number of justices on the supreme court
11. eliminating the electoral college
12. broad and deep Christophobia
13. open borders and the end of all immigration enforcement
14. euthanasia
15. requiring all persons to become vegetarians ending all cattle, hog, and poultry production
16. razing all buildings in the nation and reconstructing them to be 'green'
As more and more of these positions become widely known and understood it will be necessary for future democrat electoral victories to depend on the importation of more and more persons from the third world. Any intelligent awareness of the extremism of these proposals will engender not mere opposition but extraordinary fear of their fundamental stupidity or ignorance.
1. infanticide
2. a command economy
3. antisemitism
4. elimination of the 2nd amendment and seizure of all firearms
5. elimination of the 1st amendment
6. elimination of the presumption of innocence in American jurisprudence
7. elimination of all air travel
8. elimination of all internal combustion engines
9. elimination of the consumption of all fossil fuels
10. doubling the number of justices on the supreme court
11. eliminating the electoral college
12. broad and deep Christophobia
13. open borders and the end of all immigration enforcement
14. euthanasia
15. requiring all persons to become vegetarians ending all cattle, hog, and poultry production
16. razing all buildings in the nation and reconstructing them to be 'green'
As more and more of these positions become widely known and understood it will be necessary for future democrat electoral victories to depend on the importation of more and more persons from the third world. Any intelligent awareness of the extremism of these proposals will engender not mere opposition but extraordinary fear of their fundamental stupidity or ignorance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
