Another corrupted package deal.

Today I received an email from my Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer. She was promising stronger action to end gun violence that was manifest at the Michigan State campus a few days ago. Her concern is justified of course but her plan of action is misplaced.

You see the concept of "gun violence" is a cognitive package deal. As Ayn Rand Institute scholar Peter Schwartz pointed out in his excellent disc set "Clarity in conceptualization: the art of identifying "package deals," a package deal can be an honest concept or a dishonest one.

For example, you are looking to buy a house. You see one you like and inquire. The owner says the sale includes the vacant lot next door. It's a package deal. There is nothing wrong with that. 

But a dishonest or corrupted package deal combines two or more things that should not be combined. That is what the concept "gun violence" does. It combines the violence of assault which the Constitution forbids, with the violence of self defense which is protected by that Constitution, and condemns both as equally evil. And that is how citizens are fooled into giving up their rights. In this case, the right of self defense.

Michael Neibel

Is disagreement really a sign of weakness?

Kevin McCarthy has won the GOP House chair despite 20 Republicans refusing to endorse him without certain concessions from him. I couldn't help but notice how the collectivist mainstream media (MSM) treated the whole debate.

The January 8th Detroit Free Press carried an opinion piece by USA Today writer Connie Schultz calling the event a "circus" that "makes America look weak." On the TV media I heard others call it a fiasco, a joke and so on.

I just want to say that there was no "circus" in the German NAZI party, or in the Russian Soviet Communist Party. No disarray in Mao's Chinese Communist party nor in Pol Pot's Cambodian killing fields.

It's eye opening to see what today's MSM considers strength: unquestioning obedience/loyalty to the party where dissent/disagreement are not allowed. The above dictatorships I mentioned certainly believed in party unity.

But a party in a semi free nation can be united on certain principles yet disagree on a particular implementation of those principles. I think that's where the GOP is today. The Democrats though are all in on a party platform that want's to provide everyone with their daily bread-by the force of a loving caring government, something that has never been or will be.

Just a thought on dictatorship.

     The bloody dictator of Soviet Russia Joseph Stalin had a right hand man named Lavrentiy Beria who was once quoted as saying "Show me the man and I'll show you his crime."

     Isn't that what we see looking at the Democrat Party leadership today ever since the 2016 election? Since then the M.O. of the entire Dem party leadership has been "Show me the Republican and I'll show you his crime."

     Yes, Soviet Communism or something close, is now the goal of the Democrats. They thought they were going to get their communist dictatorship with Hillary but Trump crashed that party. Now they are digging in for another shot and are pulling out all stops. 

     What the US needs is a long range plan to restore our Constitutional Republic where every individual policy must be clearly based on the principle of individual rights. More thoughts on that soon.

Michael Neibel