https://www.facebook.com/mikhail.svetov/posts/10157735188035510 "It has somehow become “en vogue” to conflate libertarianism with market economy, open borders and globalism. To the point that everyone who dares to oppose immigration or trade is colored authoritarian and anti-freedom. I want to accentuate what libertarianism stands for and challenge the idea that open borders when implemented by the government promote freedom. Libertarianism is not about government policies. It is not even about being fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Sure, It's a neat buzzword to toss around when you need to quickly explain that all you want is to leave people to their own devices. But somewhere along the way a lot of libertarians started to take this adage literally and began to rally behind it as if it defined libertarianism. So, at the risk of losing a few friends, I want to reiterate what libertarianism stands for and what it repudiates. Libertarianism only concerns itself with the question of the legitimate use of force. When libertarians say something is wrong, they mean the following only: Someone initiated aggression against someone else or his “legitimately owned” property. That’s it. Libertarianism is thus concerned with the ethics of the use of force and is completely agnostic on the issues of open borders, tradition, religion and culture. This entails that no matter how abhorrent someone’s choices may seem, if they are not coercive they shouldn’t be treated any less than something you find commendable. Homophobic baker who refuses to serve gays is exercising his free will, your “liberal” friend who wants to have the baker prosecuted is the oppressor. Your racist uncle who wants to send his kids to a private, whites-only school is oppressed by the people who made it impossible for him to do. Your insufferable mormon neighbor who home-schools his children about God is less authoritarian than your cool atheist professor who wants to force them to study evolution. Even the Amish community is more in line with libertarian principles than Hong Kong, because their refusal to engage in trade or accept “liberal norms” comes from a place of a voluntary association and not government coercion. Transgender bathrooms, drugs legalization, teaching kids evolution, all the hot topics that are traditionally associated with individual freedom are not inherently libertarian issues. They are choices. Wherever one's personal preference may lie, every non-coercive choice is just as good as the other one. If you believe that in some instances moral interest of one person or group overrides that of another, you have no business calling yourself a libertarian. This leads me to the contentious topic of immigration. There appears to have been a schism that divided libertarians into leaning towards the alt-right and the yet unnamed alt-left. But while I’ve read plenty of libertarian critiques leveled at the alt-right, almost nothing is being said against the alt-left, despite its globalist version of the world being just as, if not more coercive. The argument for open borders usually goes something like this: Libertarians are against government in all its manifestations, borders are enforced by the government, thus libertarians must support open borders. This, however, is a fallacy, because it removes the issue from the context of the pervasive government coercion and treats it like an isolated incident. It doesn’t take into account that as long as people in the recipient country are denied freedom of association, open borders constitute the assault on their freedom. Until the civil rights act and similar laws in Europe are repealed, opening borders benefit one group at the expense of another. It’s the opposite of everything libertarians stand for. It is government coercion..."

http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/neo-nazis-publish-list-of-donald-trumps-jewish-cabal/2016/11/09/ "... Which is why it was such fun to discover, on the Wednesday morning that Donald Trump became the 45th President Elect of America, that a website called “Who Controls America?” with enlightening articles on how the Jews own absolutely everything (Wall Street, Goldman Sachs, AIG, the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve System, Big Media, Hollywood, Television, Music, Radio, Advertising, the News, and the American Civil Liberties Union — to name a miniscule few) — also lists “Donald Trump’s Jewish Cabal.” For some reason, the website insists on dividing the list of Jews into “Sephardic” and “Ashkenazic,” with the meticulousness of a Haredi yeshiva in downtown Jerusalem. The list is unbelievably long, but it’s not offensive at all. In other words, for the sake of this particular list, none of the participants need be corrupt or sinister in any way, the website doesn’t provide smarmy details about their sins, all they’ve done to be included here is be Jewish. Here are the Jews of the Trump cabal, in order of appearance. Some are very familiar, like his daughter and son-in-law. Others are billionaires who supported Trump’s campaign, and others yet are not so famous: Michael Abboud (Sephardic Jew) – Communications Coordinator, Donald J. Trump for President Paul Achleitner (Ashkenazic Jew) – Chairman, Supervisory Board, Deutsche Bank (Donald Trump’s largest lender) Sheldon Adelson (Ashkenazic Jew) – Endorser, Donald J. Trump for President Elliott Broidy (Ashkenazic Jew) – Vice Chairman, Trump Victory Committee Michael Cohen (Ashkenazic Jew) – Executive Vice President and Special Counsel, The Trump Organization Gil Dezer (Ashkenazic Jew) – President, Trump Dezer Development Michael Dezer (Ashkenazic Jew) – Founder, Trump Dezer Development Lewis Eisenberg (Ashkenazic Jew) – Chairman, Trump Victory Committee Boris Epshteyn (Ashkenazic Jew) – Senior Adviser, Donald J. Trump for President..."

http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/how-many-votes-electoral-did-gary-johnson-get-in-the-presidential-election-libertarian/ "According to the latest results, Johnson brought in 4,042,291 votes. That’s a huge jump over his 2012 campaign, when he brought in 1.2 million votes. Unfortunately, his current number of votes comes in at 3.2 percent, just shy of the 5 percent he needs to qualify the Libertarian party for federal funding in the next election. He did not get any electoral votes. His highest percentages were in New Mexico at 9.3 percent and North Dakota at 6.3 percent. He also had a few states coming in at over 5 percent. Johnson may not have gotten 5 percent, but he’s demonstrating that the Libertarians are on an upward trend. And as some supporters have pointed out, with 4 million votes, if every person donated $5, they’d have $20 million in donations and wouldn’t need federal funding for the next presidential election."

https://www.facebook.com/mikhail.svetov/posts/10157552648410510?pnref=story "I’ve been involved in Russian opposition politics for over 10 years. I saw elections being rigged, had my phone wiretapped and had Russian MP put me on the list of the top 11 online “extremists” in the letter to the prosecutor general of Russia. My friends were beaten up, shot at and maimed for simply holding the wrong opinion. Dozens were forced to leave the country. I'm the most anti-Putin person you’ll ever meet. And I want to warn you against Hillary Clinton. If you look past the media spin, you’ll notice that Hillary, not Trump, shares a disturbing similarity to Putin. Hillary, like Putin, is secretive and paranoid. Like Putin, she is ruthless, calculating and has an uncanny genius for intrigue. Like Putin, she made herself integral to the status quo — a common tactic among all budding authoritarians. She places personal loyalty over integrity and exhibits deep disdain for the press simultaneously wielding control over it. You think Hillary’s not holding a press conference for over 300 days is bad? Putin didn’t have an unscripted interview in over 10 years. If Hillary’s elected president, you better get used to it. This is how it’s started in Russia too. She’s obsessed with war and clearly prioritises international adventurism over domestic affairs. Like Putin, she’s a champion of the special interests and relies on their support for political power. Just like Putin she made a fortune through politics. And then there’s Trump. An imperfect candidate but one that can’t be more different from what dictators are actually like. Unlike Putin or Hillary, Trump is an unabashedly public figure. He’s a businessman, Putin never had a job in a private sector. Trump is comfortable in his own skin, Putin is terrified of appearing silly (just like Hillary). Trump has zero support among the establishment, Putin is supported across the aisle. Trump’s whole life, business and family been in the public eye forever. And yet the only thing that media found against him after 6 months of unprecedentedly hostile vetting is that he's vulgar? How is that in the same league with violating a subpoena or having a mole in the CNN provide debate questions in advance? How is it in the same league with running an illegal server for classified correspondence? How is it in the same league as colluding with the FBI? With lying under oath? All the things that Putin done by the way. If this somehow doesn’t sway your opinion, maybe this will: media hates Trump. If he becomes the next president, you bet the press will hold him accountable. In your heart you know that won’t be the case for Hillary Clinton. In your heart you know that if she’s elected president, the fourth estate will be further hollowed out until its carcass is indistinguishable from “Pravda”. The reason I’m writing this is I’m scared of the Hillary’s presidency. Her “Russian reset” encouraged Putin to invade Ukraine that in turn empowered him to crack down on the opposition within Russia. Because of Hillary’s policies, thousands died in Ukraine. Thousands die in Syria. Libya. Yemen. Iraq. I’m terrified that the US is ceasing to be the shining beacon of hope. That we lose you as an example. Peace only comes when America is strong. The world needs you to be strong. Hillary Clinton is a threat to the great American experiment. Don’t let her win."

http://the-jubjub-bird.livejournal.com/200335.html On taxation "So they Tax his land, Tax his bed Tax his table At which he's fed. Tax his tractor Tax his mule, Teach him taxes Are the rule. Tax his cow, Tax his goat, Tax his pants, Tax his coat. Tax his ties, Tax his shirt, Tax his work, Tax his dirt. Tax his 'baccy, Tax his drink, Tax him if he tries to think. Tax his cigars, Tax his beer, If he cries, tax his tears. Tax his car, Tax his gas, Find other ways To tax his ass, Tax all he has Then let him know That you won't be done Till he has no dough. When he screams and hollers; Then tax him some more, Tax him till He's good and sore. Then tax his coffin, Tax his grave, Tax the sod in which he's laid... Put these words Upon his tomb, 'Taxes drove me to my doom...' When he's gone, Do not relax, It's time to apply The inheritance tax."

для тех кто не в курсе расскажу. Последние три недели я изучаю английский с помощью Дуолинго, у меня хорошо получается, пока все повторяю более-менее регулярно, не могу только добраться до новых тем и повторить последние изученные темы. Как-то слишком много повторять приходится раннего и простого. На bnw часто встречаются посты, которые состоят из цитат на английском языке и мне приятно видеть, что некоторые слова я знаю и могу перевести.

#NiceAttack #NiceDriving #Nice

Чем horrible отличается от horrifying?

http://www.withurwe.com/ "Centuries hence, Man, seemingly alone in the universe, slowly spreads his civilizations across his corner of the galaxy. Tyrants vie for power, and in their fierce grip the colonies of the Milky Way are suffocating. In this society of many billions, a young marine, a highly trained war hero, returns home from his tour of duty. Physically powerful yet shy, awkward and unable to sway the masses with pretty speeches, Alistair Ashley 3nn makes a decision to strike at the hierarchy the only way he can. His decision starts him on a grand adventure, and as he is carried along by forces beyond his control, he comes to confront an ancient secret, one which may reveal Humanity’s future. "

А что если миром правят не жыдорептилоиды, а жыдодельфиноиды? http://www.theguardian.com/science/2003/jul/03/research.science "At the Institute for Marine Mammal Studies in Mississippi, Kelly the dolphin has built up quite a reputation. All the dolphins at the institute are trained to hold onto any litter that falls into their pools until they see a trainer, when they can trade the litter for fish. In this way, the dolphins help to keep their pools clean. Kelly has taken this task one step further. When people drop paper into the water she hides it under a rock at the bottom of the pool. The next time a trainer passes, she goes down to the rock and tears off a piece of paper to give to the trainer. After a fish reward, she goes back down, tears off another piece of paper, gets another fish, and so on. This behaviour is interesting because it shows that Kelly has a sense of the future and delays gratification. She has realised that a big piece of paper gets the same reward as a small piece and so delivers only small pieces to keep the extra food coming. She has, in effect, trained the humans. Her cunning has not stopped there. One day, when a gull flew into her pool, she grabbed it, waited for the trainers and then gave it to them. It was a large bird and so the trainers gave her lots of fish. This seemed to give Kelly a new idea. The next time she was fed, instead of eating the last fish, she took it to the bottom of the pool and hid it under the rock where she had been hiding the paper. When no trainers were present, she brought the fish to the surface and used it to lure the gulls, which she would catch to get even more fish. After mastering this lucrative strategy, she taught her calf, who taught other calves, and so gull-baiting has become a hot game among the dolphins."

https://c4ss.org/content/38464 "Let’s get something out of the way at the start: the state — even if it should exist — should not be involved in marriage. But libertarians who think that this is all that need be said are wrong. To see this, imagine that the government declared that blacks could not use the interstate highways. Would it be enough for libertarians to say that the government should not own and operate highways, remaining agnostic on the particular policy? Of course not, because that’s not all there is to the matter. Libertarians should say that as long as the government does own and operate highways, it must not discriminate irrationally or invidiously in their use. Why is that a proper libertarian position? It is so because libertarians, pending abolition of the state, should want to limit as far as possible its power to commit injustice, to mistreat people or deprive them of their dignity. One way to do that is to eliminate or at least restrict its power to discriminate irrationally or invidiously. Government should not have the power to issue marriage licenses, but when it exercises that power, it should not be free to deny them to gay and lesbian couples. On what libertarian grounds should same-sex couples be turned away from the licensing bureau? As Steve Horwitz writes: “Classical-liberal principles require the State to treat all citizens as equal before the law.” This, he notes, has been one of the aims of liberal movements from time immemorial. Horwitz writes: [...] It does not follow, as some libertarians suggest, that under the equality principle, laws that burden one group ought apply to all. The principle is equal protection. If the government imposed conscription on men, it would be unlibertarian to demand that women also be drafted in the name of equality under the law. On the contrary, that principle would be grounds for demanding abolition of conscription. I’ve seen it argued that if marriage consisted merely in “negative rights” — rights, that is, against aggression — a libertarian could have no objection to legalization of same-sex marriage. But, the argument goes, since contemporary marriage entails “positive rights” as well — that is, (alleged) “rights” to government-provided benefits — a libertarian should object to extending this tainted institution to more people. That argument seems plausible at first, but I believe it crumbles on closer scrutiny. [...] Let’s take an example, the federal Family and Medical Leave Act, which requires employers to provide job-protected though unpaid leave for qualified reasons. (Some states have similar laws.) Since passage of the law in 1993, FMLA benefits have been extended by the courts to same-sex couples who married in a state that recognizes that status. Now it is true that mandated family and medical leave coercively imposes costs on employers (and ultimately employees) and therefore cannot pass libertarian muster. It is also true that with this latest Supreme Court decision, FMLA benefits will now apply to more people. But contrary to some libertarians, that is no reason to condemn the Supreme Court’s decision. Rather, it’s simply a reason to work for the repeal of the FMLA. Allowing the prohibition of SSM in order to prevent expansion of the FMLA is a little like bombing a village full of innocents to kill a criminal. To avoid one harm, a great deal more harm would be done. And note: it is not married couples who compel employers to provide leave, even if they take advantage of the law. The state is the aggressor. Let’s go after it and its impositions directly. Discriminating against same-sex couples does nothing to end those impositions. It simply declares that the benefits are for heterosexual couples only."

От известного пользователя Krita и автора пособия по её компиляции для котов: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1627457613/help-print-the-full-color-webcomic-pepper-and-carr "Pepper & Carrot is a full color open source webcomc created by David Revoy. A comedy/humor webcomic suited for everyone, every age. The comic follows the adventures of a young witch named Pepper and her cat Carrot. The pages are already done, but we need your help to bring it to print for the first time. This comic is being edited, published, and printed by an independent publisher, NK Comics. Original Art and story created by David Revoy www.davidrevoy.com. Webcomic, artworks and texts are licensed under a CC-By license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/. Website for Pepper and Carrot: http://www.peppercarrot.com/ How does this "Kickstarter" thing work, anyway? See the top right corner of this page, where it says "$500 goal"? We need that much money to produce our "Pepper and Carrot Volume 1" on a timely schedule. If the goal is reached thanks to your pledges, production on the graphic novel and all of the associated rewards begin immediately! But if we don't meet our goal by the end of the 30 days, while we will all be very sad, you will not lose a penny. You will not be charged unless the project reaches its $500 goal before the deadline! The book will be full color 8in x 10in in softcover and Kickstarter exclusive Hardcover. The base amount of pages is 30+. But the more we raise the more story and making of pages will be will be added."