https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/ Politics & Philosophy by Dr. Martin D. Hash, Esq. Podcast Generator 2.5 - http://podcastgen.sourceforge.net Thu, 25 Apr 2024 14:16:06 -0700 en © Martin Hash 2016 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/images/itunes_image.jpg https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/ Politics & Philosophy by Dr. Martin D. Hash, Esq. Dr. Martin Hash Podcast Martin Hash Martin Hash Martin@Hash.com no Politics & Philosophy Half the nation loves their guns: they feel empowered, and they take great pleasure from gun ownership. Yet there is a component of this nation that wants to take that sense of satisfaction and enjoyment away. These gun control people say they're the ones who would feel better, a myopic sanctimonious selfishness. The Gun-Grabbers think that their comfort overrides someone else's pleasure. Gun Control arguments taken in their own context are impressively unconvincing: Gun-Grabbers often point to some statistic that could be reduced if there were no guns, but that whole line of argument is only a distraction because most Americans like their guns. Guns are a big part of our culture, our Constitution guarantees them, and guns are no more dangerous than driving or smoking. For the people who own guns, the positives far outweigh the negatives. In fact, after every mass gun killing, gun sales in the area increased dramatically because people want guns to feel safer and more in control of their lives. Whether these new guns actually offer protection is less important, it is the sense of doing something to protect yourself, and the feeling of security that is paramount. I’m usually the first guy to reject conspiracy theories but the constant call for gun control from the Left may have sinister implications: The Left, especially the Progressive-Marxist thinkers, would like to impose their beliefs on everyone else. As long as citizens own guns, there will never be enough police to make the populace do something they don't want to do, but eliminating guns eliminates that problem. Otherwise, I see no rational reason for more gun control laws, simply enforce the ones we have now, and let The People revel in their gun ownership. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-24_96_gun_control.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-24_96_gun_control.mp3 3:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash gun control, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 24 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Maybe because I grew up in the culture, or maybe because I'm a guy, or maybe because my family is into guns even though I don't personally own a gun, I understand Gun-Worshipers. I can maintain my interested face when people ennumerate in loving description what kinds of guns they own, the gun's most effective mode of killing, how they obtained the gun & any trivia they think I might need to know about a particular gun. It's a common theme in America, as common as football, and difficult to simply dismiss as mental illness or fanaticism. People speak of their guns much more often than their automobiles or children. It's telling that there are more private guns in the U.S. than people. Gun-worshipers come in three flavors: those who enjoy the whole idea of guns, how they're made, their historical significance, their specations, the supporting equipment, et al., as much as any hobbyist-sportsmen in any other field. Then there are the people who think of guns as personal protection. They want to arm teachers to protect against school attacks, as well as convenience stores & gas stations. To them, it seems there's no place that having guns wouldn't help. There is also the fringe element who anticipate going to war against what they think is an oppressive Government, but in a liberty nation, how a person thinks is not a crime, even though it may be kooky. After all the controversary about guns, people should know that the issue has already been decided. The Right to own guns has been ruled on in the lower courts numerous times, and SCOTUS has ruled on it twice: District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008, and McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago in 2010. They said, "[T]he Second Amendment protects a personal right to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes, most notably for self-defense within the home." I'm not sure how much clearer it can be? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-24_95_guns.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-24_95_guns.mp3 3:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash guns, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 22 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy For democracy to work there needs to be a significant overlapping of shared values & expectations. Compromise is possible because the extremes of the spectrum aren't that far apart but when they extend too far apart, that eventually leads to Civil War. When The South seceded, they were physically separated & contiguous, and could execute physical war but that will never be repeated. Geography is no longer important. The new South is virtual and this metaphorical Civil War is virtual too, and it's happening right now in our echo-chamber news reporting, Social Network culture, reality TV hero worship, and omni-information gathering. If you don't like "feminist" news, filter it from your news-feed, only watch Fox, live in the bubble. Same with the socialists: if you don't like “guns,” claim you have moral authority, watch MSNBC, set Huffington Post as your main page, listen only to other sanctimonious blather that demonizes the Right & casts them as less than human. This conflict can be described in modern terms as a virtual Civil War. An indication that we are in a virtual Civil War and have diverged as a nation is the total polarization of congress such that they operate out on the extreme boundaries of the rules: The Patriot Act, Judicial fiat, and presidential proclamations; with the FCC, Supreme Court and other rule-making institutions as the battlegrounds: climate-deniers, the NSA, militarized police, budget cliffs, government deficits, almost the entire range of government services under attack, and lots of cover from lawmakers, economists, and judges, the foot-soldiers in the virtual Civil War. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_94_virtual_civil_war.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_94_virtual_civil_war.mp3 3:03 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash virtual civil war, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 20 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Our nation chose democracy to make decisions among ourselves because democracy most closely represents liberty: one man one vote. Maximum liberty is when everybody's vote is worth the same, where one person's vote can cancel the vote of another, and a third person makes the difference. Unfortunately, those who find democracy does not lead to the outcomes that they want are posing a new threat to our liberty, the supermajority requirement. This Supermajority Congress has gone from a 51% democracy to a 60% democracy by utilizing the filibuster. There's even an emerging two-thirds supermajority requirement when the opposing Party president leverages the law by vetoing until a Bill he wants crosses his desk. Typically, supermajorities are used by conservatives because, by definition, they resist change but since political extortion has become the new norm, votes are now split along Party lines with little compromise. For example, during Obama's presidency, Republicans blocked virtually everything, no matter what, making them the most despised congress in history but then they were rewarded at the polls with landslide victories: America's version of cognitive dissonance. How does this compare to partisanship of the past? Certainly it's the worst since Franklin Roosevelt: he had a lot of shenanigans going on to get the New Deal going, and it was this bad when The South seceded but that's not exactly comforting either. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_93_supermajority_democracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_93_supermajority_democracy.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash supermajority, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The traditional political spectrum of Left vs. Right is misleading because it inappropriately gets confused with Liberal vs. Conservative, which isn't even a true dichotomy because there are certainly lots of conservative liberals. There are actually two proper Left vs. Right comparisons: first there is the socialism vs. liberty distinction with most people in-between: Liberals moderate liberty and Progressives are moderate socialists. The goals of Liberals & Progressives often overlap even though their fundamental ideologies completely oppose each other. The second important comparison is change vs. status quo, with the Left having more inclination towards change and the Right being fans of the status quo. Entrenched winners are usual to the Right for this reason, and the economic losers are Left because change would usually be in their best interests. Ironically, the Right often cites "liberty" as their primary goal but, in fact, they often advocate illiberal positions: for example, they're often for religious mandates like prayer, ecclesiastic authority & scripture; and they advocate societal restrictions like family obligations, etiquette & traditions. And the Right is full of imagined patriotism: spouting oaths, claims of loyalty & deification of military service. The Right also admires corporate rules like ethics requirements & class hierarchies. But these things are not ideological so much as a simple desire for things to stay the same. A more insidious concern exists among the ranks of the Left: America is founded on liberty, and socialism is the opposite of liberty, but America's Progressives are socialists, so the dissonance of their position forces them to torture the language and distort definitions so that somehow liberty is socialism in their vernacular. Asking them to read the dictionary is futile because they're all linguists at heart, experts at circular debates. Whatever? A socialist fantasy government would be just as totalitarian as a conservative one. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_92_left_v_right.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_92_left_v_right.mp3 3:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash the left, the right, left vs right, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 16 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy People act in predictable ways that can be traced to basic instinctual motivations: envy, greed, avarice. Enlightened people hope they can rise above such base & selfish behaviors, but intellectual honesty demands we accept that we are all predictably flawed. Indoctrination in our youth makes most of us subject to minor enumerated penalties to control our behavior: sanctions, fines, and even incarceration; but some people are immune to these kind of ephemeral persuasions. When people have nothing to lose, no esoteric threat will consciously deter them from acting out, and penalties that seem reasonable to suburbanites are not effective on folks who ignore summonses & blow-off community service. Tickets certainly don't prevent irresponsible people from acting irresponsibly & imprisonment doesn't enter their thinking. Even draconian penalties don't accomplish anything but satisfy our own desire for vengeance & control. However, the silver-lining to this minimalist view of psychology is that simple triggers work both ways. Pavlovian response is well understood and people exhibit it too. A little bit of pain will train away inappropriate behavior, and there's lots of research that says that an immediate, low-grade shock is enough to acclimatize miscreants. It’s the timing of the punishment, not the severity. If wrong-doers are tasered when apprehended then you would begin to see changes in attitude & performance, and minor infractions require only a minor stimulus: steal a candy bar, zap; cut in line at the movie theater, zap; speed, zap. Your dog won’t bite if you lightly switch it every time it tries. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_91_modifying_behavior.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_91_modifying_behavior.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash behavior modification, modifying behavior, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 14 Apr 2024 08:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world with 25% of the World's prisoners, more than all the European nations & Russia combined. Almost 25 million people have been incarcerated in America & over 2.3 million people are in jail right now. In 20 years correction expenditures rose over 350%. It's been proven that draconian penalties do not dissuade crime, we incarcerate people more out of vengeance than anything else. Terms are too long, cost too much, and dis-proportionally punish the Lower Class. And why are the penalties so arbitrary, for example, why is there is a distinction made between holding a gun or not during a robbery? And why aren't crooked "investment advisers" and other scammers just as guilty? The idea of "Prison Reform" is to only use physical jailing to protect us from people that are a threat to society, otherwise use technology to keep track of the bottom-feeders. Violent folks still need to be locked up until their testosterone subsides, but habitual offenders just need 24-hour electronic monitoring that can immediately shock them when they act out, like training an animal. Plus, paying $100K/year for each miscreant when we won't pay for your kid's college is criminal in its own right. And lastly, without the moral issues involved, logically we should simply execute people who are never getting out of prison. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_90_prison_reform.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_90_prison_reform.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash prison reform, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 12 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy New Concepts Vol 8 Let's review another batch of new & exciting original concepts: 1. Liability is a justiceless lottery that preys on greed while suppressing innovation. 2. If an enfranchised nation wants families it will have to pay for them. 3. Integration makes for a cohesive society but diversity tears it apart. 4. Everyone thinks they are being discriminated against at some point. 5. Political Correctness is a rude attempt to usurp power from the courteous. 6. The irrational rewards of victimhood have made it desirable. 7. The only thing equal about people is equality under The Law. 8. Equal-pay-for-equal-work is a cynical slogan that does not mean same-pay-for-same-work, but instead is a subtle attempt at imposing Marxism. 9. There is no systemic discrimination against women in the modern workplace. 10. Testosterone is the difference between men & women. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_89_new_concepts_vol_8.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-22_89_new_concepts_vol_8.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 10 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Testosterone is the single most-defining component of maleness. In fact, it's testosterone that turns a fetus into a male, and it was essential to our evolution: humans climbed down from the trees because men had testosterone. Testosterone makes men and women competitive: both in personal achievement & desiring public accolades. At puberty, men start getting large amounts of testosterone while women get monthly doses of estrogen, both steroids. That's why men do well at jobs that have an element of competitiveness: for example, computer programming. Women can program just as well as men but in the philosophy of "drink Coke, sleep under your desk," the average woman just doesn't have as much drive, just as the average man doesn't have the instinctual desire to nuture relationships. Testosterone also makes men aggressive which provides advantages that can roughly be measured by what in America we call "success." Aggression leads men to seek out a clear winner because that provides a lot of positive feedback about who is Alpha, causing them to continue being aggressive. The difference between men & women in society is fundamental: men get intiated into maturity via a mechanism that involves dominance by aggressive Alpha males, but females have different methods of initiation into maturity based on relationships with other women that involve emotional blackmail & control. These are visceral rights of passage, not cultural. In the end, men will hit & women will betray. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_88_testosterone.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_88_testosterone.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash testosterone, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 08 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Some people disenginuously use the fact that women and men do not participate in equal numbers in some fields as de facto discrimination, even though that claim has been categorically debunked through extensive study & investigation. It's a proven fact that there is no overt gender-based discrimination minus the child bearing & rearing aspects of motherhood. Quite to the contrary, in graduate programs across the country, two-thirds of the students are female, and Law & Medical Schools use Affirmative Action selection criteria to limit female admissions to only 60%. A second, more insidious group of schemers, use ostensible discrimination & Women's Rights arguments to promote extraordinary Rights & special treatment: these females are specifically not looking for equality, and no amount of number-crunching will change their minds. They are essentially of the opinion that women are better than men, that men have been on top long enough, and now it's their turn. They think fecund females should get preferential treatment in society because it is society's duty to propagate itself. Well then, if the needs of society override liberty like these women advocate then there also needs to be a mechanism to decide who gets to bear children for the best benefit of society. And all women who are going to take advantage of the special treatment must be willing & available to bear children. Plus, there is clear medical evidence of the age range when women should become pregnant so it is essential that society also determine when a woman is to have children. There are some secondary factors too: determining diet, such as prohibiting alcohol, and enforced breast-feeding which is important to the childs' early health. In this best-for-society reasoning, it also makes sense to dictate where in the country the child should be raised, and rather exceptional children should be removed from the home and raised by the State so that society obtains the most benefit from them. Or we could just stick with liberty. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_87_discrimnation_against_women.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_87_discrimnation_against_women.mp3 3:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash discrimination against women, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 06 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy “Equal Pay for Equal Work's” meaning is not what you first intuit because “equal” is not the same as “same.” They don't say “same pay for same work.” Proponents of “equal pay” use lawsuits as their weapon and make arguments based on statistics. In fact, there is no modern evidence of women getting paid less than men. The entire specious argument comes from the fact that the average pay of all women is not the same as the average pay of all men. Why? Because many women choose to raise families and want the flexibility of shorter hours & long work hiatus, while some men gravitate towards owning their own business or something based on individual performance that knows no clock. In Europe, where this has gotten totally out-of-hand due to their socialist thinking, they say it's society's duty to make pay equal, so they force men to take paternity leave so that they don't get ahead of the women. Also, employers often pay people who do the same job differently, called "seniority" or market pressure or "he's my cousin." Why should a woman get equal pay when men don't? It would be cool if women could force equal pay then all the guys who weren't college sports stars, short, didn't go to Ivy League schools, have no seniority, aren't related, and don't do coke will get equalized pay too. However, “Equal Pay” in this context has some unique connotations: vis-a-vi "nurses are equal to engineers" and should get "equal" pay, which is also not the same as "same pay" because "equal pay" includes years that may have been taken out of their careers to raise children, which they say is "equal" to actually working during those years. So listen closely when the Equalists are speaking or you may not hear what they're actually saying. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_86_equal_pay_for_equal_work.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_86_equal_pay_for_equal_work.mp3 3:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash equal pay for equal work, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 04 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The word “equal” in a slogan immediately signals that somebody has a selfish agenda they want to hide behind seemingly sincere rhetoric. There's a whole political philosophy based on equality called "social justice.“ Their idea of equal is to reverse control by putting the decision of what is “fair” into their hands with the species idea that hard work & effort always result in success, but in America, Market Forces & luck determine what you're worth. Equalists dislike that concept, they want people to get paid for their effort, not their results. The Equalists go even further, postulating that all people deserve to share in all things equally, that the upper half should contribute to the lower half until everybody is equal, Soviet style. The fact is, we are not equal: liberty allows people to benefit unequally as a result of their own effort. Nothing about the lucktocracy is equal except that we’re all equal in the eyes of The Law. Since liberty trumps equality in America, the equality folks need stealth and subterfuge to accomplish their goals. The prey on people's envy, spite & perversity; they evoke “fairness” & torture the language; they exploit the political process and the civil judicial system. In other countries, these people have another name for themselves: Marxists. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_85_equality.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_85_equality.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash equality, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 02 Apr 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy As an adjundt to Political Correctness, and with a lot of the same actors, America has developed a reverence for victimhood, so-much-so that we have shrouded victims in words like “brave” & “enduring.” The cult of victimhood is a bizzare overreaction by people who use it to mollify their own sense of sympathy & poor self-worth. These people are the enablers of victims. Plus we incentivize this culture of blame & perverse behavior, primarily as a result of our unfettered liability industry. To be a victim is to claim preferential treatment, monetary rewards, scantimonious posturing & ancedotal expertise. Also claiming victimhood is a common tactic of The Left to get control and reverse responsibility: instead of liberty where people are responsible for their own actions, victims can claim someone else is responsible and therefore society owes them. Most people choose to be victims: disabled people aren't victims, handicaped people don't want to be seen as victims, mentally ill people certainly aren't victims, people who grew up in a in less than optimal environment aren't victims, war vetrans aren't victims, neither are survivors of a castotrophy: in fact, the only real victims are those whose trust is violated & courtesy exploited by others claiming victimhood. That makes us all victims. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_84_victimhood.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_84_victimhood.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash victimhood, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 31 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Language has always been a technique used by the weak to gain control, as well as making themselves feel superior, smug, self-satisfied & they revel in the deep satisfaction of moral outrage. They also use shunning, shaming & ridicule as their weapons, and even legal intimidation to gain advantage over others. Political Correctness is a way to enforce rules on society outside of the Rule of Law, and caters to a paternalistic totalitarian attitude, a tyranny by the minority. PCers take a fascist glee in their containment of free speech, and rule over the collective, which is how they see society. PCers also attack cultural memory: jokes, old adages, stories & descriptive terms. They do it by redefining words & giving the ownership of some words to specific groups: for example, only Blacks can say “nigger” and only women can say “cunt,” and the word “hate” has entered the lexicon as reason enough to imprison people for thought crimes. Listen for the code phrase “raising awareness” whenever some educational institution is about to publish a banned words list that can result in a student getting expelled. Actually, Political Correctness has been used throughout history, is totally predictable and has only gotten out of hand because we have let it due to our liberty-based live-n-let-live attitude. We wish to be let alone in return for leaving others alone, but the PCers have abused our trust. Political Correctness is a nightmarish scourge and should be treated like any threat to our Rights: college administrators who allow “no say” words should be reprimanded, public officials who offer moral condemnations should be sanctioned, and elected representatives playing the PC card should be confronted using the same tactics as the purveyors of this nonsense use: derogatory signs, boisterous interruption & constant look-at-me tactics. Political Correctness tears at the very fabric of a free society & its acolytes should be held accountable for their actions just like any criminal. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_83_political_correctness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_83_political_correctness.mp3 3:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash political correctness, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 29 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Most people have no personal experience with real discrimination, they've only read about it, seen it in the media & heard stories, but people often think they are being discriminated against: teachers pick on them, referees call unwarranted fouls & even waiters seem to take a personal interest in disrespecting them. A lot of what people think is discrimination is part discourtesy, part self-interest, but mostly a sense of persecution. But also, if history is to be believed, every immigrant wave into America has had a serious headwind of discrimination impinging their liberty, so there is undeniably also something real. Discrimination is everywhere if you are looking for it: you have a Right of Association so you can discriminate who your friends are, you have the Freedom of Movement so you can discriminate where you live, anti-monopoly laws give you discrimination in commerce, and you certainly have the Right to indiscriminately say anything you please. Discrimination is one of the benefits of a liberal society, however, our right to discriminate is being co-opted by people who seek control through victimhood. They mix everyday discrimination with the rare liberty-abusing kind in an attempt to bolster their case for special treatment. The advantages of victimhood plus people's natural tendency to blame others for their own problems has made the claim of discrimination a popular one. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_82_discrimination.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_82_discrimination.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash discrimination, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 27 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy A country's strength is measured by its homogeneity, with just a dash of local custom & cultural color. A common belief in liberty is mandatory, as is not impinging on other peoples' liberty, plus a common language, education, the recognition of the value of work ethic, and a common overall direction for society. A mishmash of countries like the EU fails all of these things, so any unified world order is completely out of the question. New immigrants by the millions have come to America, learned the language, absorbed the culture, and become acclimated to the American way of thinking & doing things. In fact, it used to be so prevalent an attitude & process that America was called the Melting Pot, but that is now coming under attack. When people seek control, they use language and social pressure to turn their desires into a mandate. Because diversity has a casual appeal, and because much of the public educational structure promotes diversity as part of a Liberal Arts education, there is an attempt to usurp control by exploiting courtesy, White liberal guilt & governmental power. The forces promoting diversity are tearing America's homogeneity apart: they want their own languages, their own vacation days, their own laws even, and they're by-n-large socialists. Integration, not diversity, is the secret to America's future success, just as it was in the past. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_81_diversity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-20_81_diversity.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash diversity, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 25 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Nothing is more central to the perpetuation of society than families, in truth, society exists for families. Our tax code justifiably subsidizes families & though single people resent that advantage, the fact is single people are drones & their liberty & self-interest become secondary from a society perspective. But children are expensive & certainly limit the lifestyle options of the parents, so given a rational choice, without a predilection towards motherhood, without the biological imperative, without religious indoctrination, it seems likely the natural course would be for a society to slowly die-out, which is happening now in many of the advanced nations. This trend is entirely due to the empowerment of women in the modern world & puts them in de facto control of society. The Scandinavian countries have recognized this so they pay for children directly. Whether the incentive is perverse or not depends on your point-of-view, which is affected by your own self interest which is tied to your gender. Traditional Americans like to think that fathers are an essential part of families but that is probably a values question because successful single-motherhood proves fathers are simply sperm-donors. As society capitulates to the cult of motherhood where women are in control then gender equality, public-provided daycare & early schooling all come into focus. These issues have tremendous impact & basically pit women's interests against men's. Somebody has to give. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_80_families.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_80_families.mp3 2:47 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash families, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 23 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liability is about making the injured party whole: sounds fair & egalitarian, I feel sorry for injured people. But what if the injured party is struck by lightening? What if the responsible party is not insured & has no money? What if the injured party causes their own injury? People have terribly disappointing & debilitating things happen to them all the time: they could lose a foot due to diabetes, or their mother dies in a car accident; they could get leukemia, or their child may need special help; there may be a hurricane, or the love of their life doesn't love them anymore. Almost all disappointments have no monetary remuneration, and to turn disability, mental or physical, into a jackpot makes us a nation of erstwhile victims. Also, the single biggest cause of irrational business decisions is the threat of liability litigation. Liability: civil lawsuits aimed at transferring money from those deemed “perpetrators” to those deemed “victims” causes the most egregious distortions of rational behavior. All because of stifling blame, accusations, lawsuits, and the emotional distress instigated by liability. Liability is like a singularity in space that causes everything else to distort around it. How many scientific advancements are not made? How many playgrounds, theaters, and public venues are not available? How many services are not rendered? What business concepts are abandoned out of frustration simply because there is a nebulous threat of liability? Liability must change dramatically. Once again, like universal healthcare, Britain shows us the way: award caps, loser pays, no jury trials in Civil court, and no contingency fees. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_79_liability.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_79_liability.mp3 3:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liability, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 21 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review another new batch of original ideas you have heard: 1. Government only owes its citizens protection, education, husbandry of natural resources, contract enforcement & healthcare: everything else is charity. 2. Business must be kept in an adversarial relationship with Government. 3. Money is imaginary, and all money is Government money. 4. The Stock Market is a Ponzi scheme fueled by retirement fund money. 5. The National Debt is the result of insufficient taxes but everyone still benefiting from Government largess. 6. America maintains its standard of living by collecting tribute from the World. 7. All Government spending is stimulus spending: a person's ideology determines what the money should be spent on. 8. The productivity of America results in a rising Standard of Living though the distribution skews towards the wealthy. 9. Increasing Income Inequality distorts the perception of work ethic & engenders distrust. 10. Wealth Redistribution can only be accomplished with taxation. 11. Inflation will eventually pay America's debts. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_78_new_concepts_vol_7.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_78_new_concepts_vol_7.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 19 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy U.S. government debt cannot be reconciled. The Debt itself, ~$18 trillion, isn’t nearly as impossible as government pension obligations which are $24 trillion, Medicare which is $42 trillion, and Social Security, another $21 trillion. There are 116 million American households and about half pay taxes so each taxpaying household is on the hook for approximately $2 million dollars, a lifetime of earnings for most people. The only obvious solution is inflation: 1000% over 3 years, about 7% per month, and if it was a gradual increase, it wouldn't catch people by surprise. Also, during that time of upheaval would be an opportunity for political action, including a Balanced-Budget Amendment, and making taxes more progressive. Who gets hurt by high inflation? Companies that loan money, high-end pensioners, and people with cash in the bank. Inflation is essentially a transfer of wealth from those who lend money to those who borrow it, while the poor are mostly unaffected. Social Security & healthcare are indexed to inflation, so those people will be safe. Retirees would be the biggest losers but by definition, they consume more than they produce, and retirees are usually the people who benefited from the debt in the first place so inflation consuming their savings is somewhat karmic. America has many mechanisms to delay the onset of inflation, but it's not a matter of if, only a matter of when? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_77_inflation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_77_inflation.mp3 2:42 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash inflation, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 17 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The increasing wealth accumulation of the Nouveau Aristocracy has created a wealth inequality in this country that threatens the very concept of liberty because wealth gets inordinate access to power, primarily through co-opting the media & compromising politicians, thereby decreasing the personal liberty & opportunity of everyone else, and this will only get worse as the lucktocracy consolidates over generations and a de facto class system emerges, as it is doing now. The wealthiest 1% of the U.S. Population own 40% of the nation's wealth, while the bottom 80% of the population only own 7%. The disparity is increasing & the Middle Class is shrinking: this cannot continue. Ever-increasing compounding of wealth is simple mathematics, not the result of exceptional skill or merit. Anyone who has every played the game Monopoly knows that eventually one player owns everything while everyone else gradually diminishes to bankruptcy, but the entrenched winners will, of course, predictably ague in their self-interested reasons why they somehow deserved their dynastic status. Our Liberty society can accommodate selfish consumption & accumulation of wealth if it is periodically redistributed, but creates dissatisfaction & socialism if it isn't. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_76_wealth_redistribution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_76_wealth_redistribution.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash wealth redistribution, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 15 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy More than half of Americans make less than $30K/yr. Income Inequality, the difference between the highest paid 1% in this nation and the majority of wage-earners, is usually debated as “fairness,”and even liberty-abiding people are cannot fully excuse the ridiculous disparity of income for jobs that many people could do if given the chance. A lucktocracy creates extreme winners: in the last century, high marginal tax rates discouraged greed, but a Baby-Boom Conservative-voting demographic allowed Ronald Reagan to lower marginal tax rates, which were further reduced by Bill Clinton, and suddenly greed was rewarded and it made sense to leverage for as much salary as possible because you got to keep most of it no matter how much.Increasing Income Inequality creates a de facto Class system, and violates the social contract of “I'll obey your laws & let my children fight in your wars as long as you maintain the promise of equal opportunity & equal protection under the law.” At some point the 1% became special, distorted caricatures of conspicuous consumption & ostentatious wealth that normal people correctly interpreted as totally disproportionate to the amount of effort to get it. The skews the perception of work ethic, engenders distrust & reinforces the idea of a lucktocracy; worse yet, it creates an atmosphere of extreme dog-eat-dog, second-place-is-the-first-loser competitive mentality that leaves nothing for anyone else. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_75_income_inequality.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_75_income_inequality.mp3 2:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash income inequality, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 13 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Now is the best time to be alive, and a minute from now will be even better, and the hour after that gets better too. Market Forces-based economies relying on the fundamental human motivations of greed, avarice, vanity & envy require no outside coercsive force, and seem to be the secret to an ever increasing standard of living. There are ideologs that argue for simplier times but their basic premise that there was some imagined better time than this is fundamentally wrong. And, of course, by trying to force their vision on the world, they violate the liberty of everyone else. It's the same old, know-better-n-you paternalistic, self-conceited blather that socialists always bring to a debate.Standard of Living is entirely the result of productivity. The reason people are better off is because America produces $16 trillion of goods & services every year and spread it around. The .01% UberRich keep $4 trillion, which they mostly invest, and everyone else basically spends theirs to keep afloat, but at ever increasing standards of living. The old "a rising tide lifts all ships" adage obviously has its upside, but make no mistake, without wealth redistribution there is also a mathematical certainty of a rising Nouveau Aristocracy. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_74_rising_standard_of_living.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_74_rising_standard_of_living.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash standard of living, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 11 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The disconnect between how economics really works and how most people think it works is astonishing, frustrating, and sad. You cannot judge Government spending based on how a family would manage its own money because economics is not the same as budgets. Governments make an economy, Government money needs no source, and it doesn't matter what Government spends money on, it's all stimulus: Public Works are stimulus, Military spending is stimulus, even Welfare is stimulus. All Government spending is stimulus but a person's ideology determines how they want to spend the "stimulus." Milton Friedman thought dropping buckets of money from helicopters is the ideal solution, and John Maynard Keynes thought people getting paid for digging holes & filling them in again is as good as any government employment. Your ideology may vary.Like any system, an economy requires feedback for stability: proper accounting would be stimulus out equal taxes in. Over history, such as now, that's not always the case. If people don't think the system is stable, they mistrust it or exploit the instability, both lead to the system crashing. Since the concept of fiat currency, imaginary money, first appeared in France in the 1600s, unstable monetary systems have been crashing with some regularity due to lack of feedback. People resist feedback because, by definition, some amount of what they have is fed back into the system, and the exploiters resist feedback because they benefit from the instability. That's why artifical constraints are put on monetary supplies, like a gold standard or borrowing caps were put in place. These things aren't required for an economy, they are substitutes for feedback. Of course, feedback is the perfect solution but people don't want to pay their feedback taxes. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_73_stimulus_spending.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_73_stimulus_spending.mp3 3:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash stimulus spending, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 09 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Does America's $18 trillion National Debt ever have to be paid back? The short answer is no. America can run Trade & Budget deficits indefinitely on the backs of foreign "investment." The U.S. is subsidized by the rest of the world via Treasuries, and we have no intention to ever pay them back, our nation depends on the money. We can do this because of our economic power, so essentially the rest of the world is "taxed” to maintain the American standard of living.This could perhaps go on forever if the $ remains the World's de facto reserve currency because what else are foreigners going to do with $ after running up stock prices & buying expensive apartments in NYC? If the citizens of those nations truly knew the facts, the Ponzi scheme would collapse, not because it doesn't work, but because people are resentful, envious & perverse, and don't like seeing others benefiting at their expense, especially not Americans. At some point, for the same reason people resent the 1% even though their own lives are immeasurably good, the World will probably discontinue enabling the U.S. debt-mongers, and I wouldn't blame them. But even if other nations do become aware of the situation, how would they change it? It's one of the perks of being the World's only Superpower, we deserve to receive our hegemonic tribute, they're only the spoils of empire returning to Rome. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_72_tribute_economics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_72_tribute_economics.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash tribute economics, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 07 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Currently, the U.S National Debt is $18 trillion, that's larger than the GNP, equivalent to over $150,000 owed per taxpayer. The reason is that Americans live as if there are no budget constraints: The Rich continue not paying enough taxes to cover the yearly national budget deficit, and beneficiaries of Government largess continue to receive their bounty. The National Debt is simply a 35 year accumulation of the Budget Deficit, and there's no end in sight. In years past severe angst & much gnashing of teeth accompanied any discussion of a National Debt: many doomsayers predicted ruin, gold shot up in value, and essentially nothing happened. That isn't to say there won't be a reckoning eventually but what form it may take is unknown: we certainly cannot predict the future by looking at the past.Treasury Bonds last > 10 years, and many, like EE, last 20-30 years. Debt with that kind of maturity is essentially passing the bill to the next generation. Also, older people tend to be the ones that have accrued enough money that they can buy Treasury Bonds, and a large percentage of them will have died during the 10-30 year period, making some portion of their debt subject to Estate Tax, thereby further reducing the obligation. Inflation over 20 years is also a significant reduction, especially if the Bonds are very low yield, as they are now, which are essentially at zero. And as a final resort, the U.S. government could simply print its way out of debt, so in reality the U.S. has no apocalyptic debt burden. The goal should be to keep people employed, prevent shortages, and let Market Forces take care of the rest. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_71_national_debt.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-19_71_national_debt.mp3 3:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash national debt, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 05 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy It's been said so often nobody listens anymore but the most honest description of the Stock Market is a casino. Even a cursory look at the numbers underline that fact: an investment should be worth the amount of money it returned over its holding but a share of stock is priced much, much higher than that, way more than the stock would ever return. If you get caught holding it when the music stops, your money is gone, but its even worse than that: the value of the underlying company the stock is supposedly based on, that too is almost whimsy, and will evaporate quickly.This stocks deception is accepted without criticism because everyone else seems to be ignoring it, and there's the constant drumbeat of investment “advice” from an entire industry that makes its living from it. Because the Stock Market seems to make money for some people, it is touted as an investment, but it is more a Ponzi scheme, and acts like one. Casinos are mathematically constructed to skim a small percentage off the gross with the rest of the customer's money returned as winnings, a zero sum gain reshuffling with the winners equaling the losers, but Ponzi schemes give most of the customer's money to the insiders. At least Vegas offers entertainment while you're getting fleeced.The vast majority of people have no stocks except in the form of Retirement. In fact, the entire stock Ponzi scheme leverages off the trillions of dollars of retirement money that is basically hidden from view. Promised benefits to existing retirees are way over what the funds can sustain so the fund must get income somewhere but nothing pays the 10% they need except the Ponzi scheme junk bonds & hedge funds. And there lies the truth of the entire market: some time in the future those promised pensions you were depending on, well that money's gone to create the empire of the Nouveau Aristocracy. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_70_stock_market.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_70_stock_market.mp3 3:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash stock market, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 03 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The 5th and 14th Amendments of The Constitution promise to defend life, liberty & property, but what exactly that means is the source of much debate. Philosopher John Locke, the 17th century originator of the terms, had rather parochial definitions; he thought of life in its prosaic sense, of simply one's organic life; but America's founders took the definition of “life” beyond face value, to mean no caste system, no indentured servitude or Debtors prisons, so people could live their own lives. “Property” means Real Estate in law; peons in the 17th Century couldn’t own property, but Locke intended the term to include all things people can possess. Locke uses “liberty” as a synonym for freedom but the American definition is vastly expanded and means personal autonomy; people making decisions for themselves, and reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of their own actions; bounded only by the liberty of others. The Preamble of The Constitution supports this expanded definition by stating, “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” At least these are the definitions recognized in American jurisprudence, which is all that matters, really. There are a lot of people who confuse the constitutional guarantees of life, liberty & property with a similar phrase found in the Declaration of Independence guaranteeing life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness: America does not promise happiness; no nation could; happiness is subjective and the responsibility of the individual, not The State; but The Declaration is not legal canon, and understanding what “pursuit of happiness” means would require reading Benjamin Franklin’s mind, the person who edited it into the document. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-03_922_life__liberty__property.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-03_922_life__liberty__property.mp3 2:53 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, life, liberty, property, pursuit of happiness no Fri, 01 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy If someone who has corn doesn't want to trade for your shoes but he'll take a chicken, and another guy has a chicken and will take your shoes, you could make it work, but then another guy comes along and he'll dig ditches for some shoes but you need chickens, hmmm, this gets complicated very quickly, which is why creative humans came up with the imaginary concept of money, which sure beats chickens. Money is imaginary because everyone has to make-believe it's worth something. It doesn't have to be backed with anything tangible: no gold, no stocks, and certainly no crypto-data-mining. The only thing needed to ensure money has value is threat of violence in case your greed overwhelms your imagination. Only governments have the force to maintain the illusion of money, which is why all money is government money.One of the remarkable things about money is that the amount is elastic: increasing & disappearing almost miraculously as needed. Banks are an example of this: for every dollar a bank gets it can imaginarilly create thirty more dollars, and the stock market can multiply a single dollar by the thousands using financial instruments called derivatives. Conveniently, when all this expanded imaginary money is no longer needed, it simply disappears...Nothing is as ephemeral as money which is why it is such a powerful concept, and dangerous. Governments, being the purveyors of money, can take advantage of their power to manipulate it for political interests, lowering its value & thereby violating Government's explicit guarantee to protect the property of individuals. The stodgy old idea of a Gold Standard is meant to prevent Government's abuse of money by artificially limiting the amount, but shackling money is much more a hindrance to liberty than protection. Also, Government has other obligations to its citizenry that may override property, requiring it to manipulate money. The line between exercise & exploitation of money is fine indeed. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_69_money.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_69_money.mp3 3:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash money, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 01 Mar 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Market forces work because the granularity of decision making is very small, down to a single customer choosing the best solution at that very instant with the best available information specific to that person. Then business responds to the demand for products, less here, more there, faster, slower, an impossibly unplanable choreography: intricate order emerging from infinite chaos. But good & bountiful products are only a side effect of the real motive of business, which is to make money. Because Liberty is no-holds-barred unless you're not impinging on others, business requires oversight & enforcement of the rules, both of which come from government. Obviously, like any negotiation, business & Government must be in an adversarial relationship, with no collusion, no partnerships, no lobbying & no regulatory capture. So far, so bad. No one likes their profit opportunities thwarted so there is intense backlash from business towards any perceived interference from government; in fact, be very suspicious if there is no conflict. It's entirely within business' prerogative to make whatever effort necessary to gain profit, and often this conflicts with the wishes or best interests of others. Enforcement of rules & contracts is one of government's three primary purposes: without it there are no markets, there is no profit, and there is no business. Business and government are amoral in their relationship: government is expected to play the game without preconception, personalization or preference, while business cannot lobby, insult, threaten, hamper, bribe or extort without penalization. How could any game possibly be played otherwise? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_68_business_v_government.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_68_business_v_government.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash business, government, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 29 Feb 2024 08:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy America is the only Liberty-first nation. Liberty means that the individual comes before the group unless due process of law. A Socialist nation puts the group before the individual, and in fact, we have many socialist institutions in the U.S. because that happens to be the best approach for some things, the biggest being the military. However, our biggest socialist institution is government. It has to be: a government is supposed to think of everybody when it makes a decision. In fact, we The People hate it when someone gets special treatment.Modern government gave us the Industrial revolution, lengthened our lifespans, and protects our good life because we made a deal with each other to watch our back. Government’s role is to do the things private enterprise cannot do: protection, welfare, healthcare, environment & education, because those functions are both essential & vulnerable to exploitation. However, these are the only things Government owes its citizens. That's the difference between a liberty nation and a socialist nation: Government does not guarantee you a house, a job, or even food. Americans assume you are responsible for yourself, and if you can't make it then maybe we will provide some charity.I need Government to protect me from the tribe across the hill, enforce my contracts & my will, and take care of me when I'm ill. Anything else is up for debate, but those three things are pretty much mandatory. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_67_government.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_67_government.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash government, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 27 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review another new batch of original ideas you have heard: 1. Free Trade is the most expensive trade on the planet. 2. There has to be a reason not to be on Welfare. 3. Charity is not an obligation: it's the giver's choice, not the recepient's Right. 4. Homeless people don't need homes, they need institutionalized & assisted living shelters. 5. Instilling a Work Ethic is in our nation's best interest. 6. Entitlements are what Americans want & it doesn't make any difference how they're paid for. 7. Tax Reform is code for stopping the wealth redistribution to the Middle Class. 8. Flat Tax is the idea that the Poor & Middle Class don't pay enough taxes. 9. People must be indoctrinated to accept tax increases. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_66_new_concepts_vol_6.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_66_new_concepts_vol_6.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 25 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Taxpayers have no real connection or input into the budget process, or where the money goes, or what the priorities are. They assume that increased taxes goes into government pensions, weapons, or given away to foreign countries. This makes taxes politically dangerous & encourages asinine demagoguery from people who disingenuously promise not to raise taxes, or that somehow taxes will be paid by other people, or through some magic process such as growth, spending cuts, or closing loopholes. But human nature isn't going to change, and people aren't going to give up government services, and taxes aren't going to pay themselves.Simply using the political correctness solution of renaming tax increases to something more palatable like “revenue enhancements” or “increased inflows,” only inspires more contempt & misunderstanding. The real solution is obvious but never mentioned: indoctrination & advertising. Now, all most children ever hear about taxes is their own negative experience with Sales Tax, and the impressions they get from their tax-hating parents. Taxes need to be taught to students as part of math, and discussed more in social studies. Their role as the only tool that government has needs to be clarified & lauded. Then as adults, taxes need to be explained in glossy advertising campaigns just like teeth whiteners & erectile dysfunction drugs. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_65_tax_increases.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_65_tax_increases.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash tax increases, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 23 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Often the sycophants of the Nouveau Aristocracy disingenuously propose a “flat” tax, couched in the guise of simplicity & fairness to hide their true intent which is to cut taxes for the wealthy. They say “simple” but it's simple now: computers do it. In fact computers don't care how complex the tax code is, so whatever arcanery is needed to serve the American people, no problem. And fair? Math doesn't care about fairness & these people obvious don't possess even simple math skills because then they would know that since 20% of wealthy taxpayers pay 80% of total taxes, therefore for every 1% taxes go down for the wealthy, they go up 4% for everyone else. So for a rich person's 35% tax rate to go down to 30%, a poor person's 10% tax rate would have to go up to the 30% Flat Tax. Essentially, Flat-Taxers are saying that poor people don't pay enough taxes.When confronted with these facts, Flat-Taxers admit that their real goal is of the starve-the-beast variety, to force a reduction in Government spending by cutting off their revenue. Obviously, they intend to fool you with the feint... How do you feel about that? Being misled? The whole Flat Tax fallacy is actually an insidious attack on government subsidies to families & the Middle Class. It's all about lowering taxes on The Rich so they can get rich faster, and have more with which to start a new dynasty for their bloodline. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_64_flat_tax.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_64_flat_tax.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash flat tax, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 21 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Tax Reform is one of those cheap political pandering tactics that makes honest debate about the real issue impossible. It is a Trojan horse to obscure the pro-socialization agenda of the Left or the anti-government agenda of the Right, depending on which side you are on. I used to be surprised every time there was a new call for “tax reform,” I could not understand why the conditions that require changes in taxes could not be predicted and accounted for, especially considering Government’s many decades of experience in taxation, and the sheer volume of modern tax law covering every possible contingency. Now it's clear to me that the people advocating these reforms are being duplicitous: The Right claims they can lower tax rates by getting rid of "loopholes," especially the ones that the Middle Class benefits from, like mortgage interest & home property taxes, medical expenses, education credits, retirement accounts, "green" subsidies, and the other goodies that redistribute income from the wealthy to the rest of us. Only the Middle Class benefits from Itemized Deductions because those phase out at higher income levels. On-the-other-hand, Depletion Allowance & Depreciation are tax evasion vehicles of The Rich. But that's not where the real money is: the real rip-off of Americans is the special treatment of Capital Gains, which only The Rich benefit from, and the Middle Class pay for. Here's how the Capital Gains Tax Cuts scam works: the Nouveau Aristocracy has convinced you that their money has more merit than yours so they don’t have to pay as much. They think that economic activity most efficiently trickles down from the top, and that you should be grateful to them for their rare & astute business acumen. Horse-pucky.We have decided as a society that we want people to own houses. We want them to send their kids to college, and even go themselves. We want them to save money to retire, reduce their carbon footprint, and take care of their parents who have moved in due to old age. We want it, we vote & there's a lot of us. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_63_tax_reform.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_63_tax_reform.mp3 3:24 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash tax reform, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 19 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy People like the idea of entitlements because it puts control in their hands. Entitlements are a contractual obligation for government to perform for the benefit of all the people, which explains the popularity of entitlements among an overwhelming portion of the population. Social Security & Medicare are the entitlements that have the most impact on the greatest number of people. Both of those entitlements were promoted under false pretenses in order to be put into law, making recipients think they earned them in some way, but in reality, they are simply government-sponsored Ponzi schemes. However, because of the way economics works, it doesn't really make any difference, any problems will take care of themselves in the future.When politicians talk about cutting services, entitlements, whatever, under the mistaken belief that some catastrophic budgetary time-bomb must be prevented, they seem to forget that the nation adopted those things for its citizens. Democracy comes first, so The People can decide what they want and how they want to pay for it. If that means tax The Rich or inflation then that's the choice they make. Entitlements are a fundamental part of making the rest of us care what happens to America because folks will take pride in something they have a stake in, and encourage their children to defend the nation they feel part of. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_62_entitlements.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_62_entitlements.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash entitlements, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 17 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy It seems obvious that a nation must produce more than it consumes, so it's in a nation's self-interest to encourage work ethic, or at the very least, not discourage it. Workless Welfare is dangerous because it sets people's expectations to be only consumers. Unfortunately, work ethic is at the mercy of both the liberty vs. socialism ideological conflict & the fact that lots of people simply would not work if not forced to. The very essence of civilization hinges on whether a society thinks that work ethic is one its most important ingredients. There are many reasons for lack of jobs but the one consistent fact is that people need income to live. We could either give them free money with no obligations attached or require some kind of Make-Work to remind them that they are impinging upon the courtesy, good will & charity of others, as well as to maintain their work ethic. It would be nice if the Make-Work were more than simply digging-holes-n-filling-them but from a purely practical view, for many chronically unemployed people, the "jobs" provided must be much more like the military, because these people need discipline & structure. In fact, most of this Make-Work will take more management than they will produce but at least people will be working, and some will be able to move on into regular employment. And like any job, there will be lots of difficulty, nastiness, dishonesty, lying, cheating, stealing, etc., so the public's expectations must be kept to ethic first & job training second.Also, to create Make-Work jobs, the public employee unions will have to be confronted. Public Employee unions have provisions in their contracts preventing Government from creating any "Community Service" jobs. Public Employee unions want any jobs to be under their union, paying into their retirement scams, but Make-Work must be subsistence only to discourage long-term reliance on it, certainly no cushy union rules, collective bargaining, or career rah-rah, otherwise people with real jobs would want those plum public employee jobs. The fact is, with the Public Employee unions on one side, and the "I deserve free money" folks on the other, it seems unlikely any Community Service Make-Work job program is possible, but as a nation we have to recognize what we're giving up by not instilling work ethic in our citizens. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_61_work_ethic.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-18_61_work_ethic.mp3 3:53 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash work ethic, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 15 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy I've worked in the "homeless" environment, both as a lawyer and as a doctor in E. Oakland, Harlem & S. Miami. There are about 100,000 hardcore, no solution street people out there. These are not able-bodied folks who are just down on their luck, the vast majority of these people can't do any jobs, and no amount of education or retraining is going to fix them. Blame Political Correctness for taking away the descriptive terms for the real problem population, words like "bums," "winos" & "panhandlers.” These aren't people you want to associate with outside a charitable capacity, and they need constant supervision just to eat.And how is it our public spaces get consumed by these people? Because Do-Gooders are under the misimpression that everyone is rational, competent & able to make logical decisions, and all the homeless need is a “home,” but a home is the last thing they need. Instead, many need to be put in mental health facilities but that costs big money. Alcoholics are the most expensive, and schizophrenics are the scariest, but the majority are just plain stupid: not drunks, not mentally ill, just incapable of doing anything productive, and certainly can't have any responsibility of any kind. Assisted living shelters is all that works for them.For folks who just need a job, a Jobs Program would be a far better investment than a mishmash of safety nets, charities, group homes, soup kitchens & the like, and there's no reason to mix competent people in with the rif-raf. Combine Housing Apps, like AirBnB, with some government assistance, and the couple folks just down on their luck can stay at my house. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-17_60_homelessness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-17_60_homelessness.mp3 3:04 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash homelessness, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 13 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Liberty means you are responsible for your own actions, no one else is, and if people want to help you, it's called charity. Charity puts the control on the side of the individual providing the charity, but since every person seeks control, the recipients of that charity try instead to insist that it is their Right to receive it, thereby they gain control. They essentially want everyone else working for them, as do we all.In the battle between liberty & socialism, individual verses group, the same questions always emerge: who is responsible, who decides, and what & how much are we responsible for? With liberty, you are responsible for yourself, but socialists, and especially Marxists, are constantly trying to reverse the obligation, thereby reversing control. If the obligation is that you are responsible for yourself, and I am providing you charity then I may ask that you rhetorically dig-holes-and- fill-them-back-in as a sign that you at least have the commitment to help yourself by exhibiting your work ethic & understanding of your own responsibility in The Deal which we call society. However, on the opposing side, the reversing-responsibility people attempt to gain control by insisting the beneficiaries of charity have a Right to receive it, and they want to dictate what the rest of us owe them, which of course is the opposite of liberty. Charity verses obligation is perhaps the most contentious battlefront in the liberty verses socialism war. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-17_59_charity_v_obligation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-17_59_charity_v_obligation.mp3 2:50 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash charity, obligation, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 11 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy When liberty-people hear the word, “fairness,” they're thinking that the rules of the game must be the same for everyone, but socialists use “fairness” as a weasel-word to imply new Rights. There is no Right to a decent life: no one is owed a house, a car, or even food. In America, life is a liberty culture, and you are responsible for both the rewards & consequences of your life: fairness does not play a part in it. However, our human motivations of pity & charity prompt us to provide a societal safety net for unfortunate people, called Welfare. Unfortunately the supporting argument for providing a social safety net is undermined by those who abuse it: Welfare may be prevalent but it should not be popular.Welfare is difficult to fit into an ideology. Socialists, of course, believe that those who have more should be forced to give to those who don't. And Conservatives, for the most part, have religious teachings advocating helping those less fortunate than themselves. Because both groups kind of agree on something, and since out-of-sight-out-of-mind is also a motivation, the implementation of our charitable inclinations can be captured & leveraged by Special Interests who exploit the largely unsupervised expenditures from the public coffers. They insist their compassion is the correct model because they know-better-n-than-you, and often personally benefit from the public's largess.Welfare is accepted by most Americans as a short term solution to some problems, and only long term for the most egregiously incompetent, but it is our charity, not our obligation, to provide it. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-17_58_welfare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-17_58_welfare.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash welfare, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 09 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy When I was young, I was a Free Trader because it seemed like the sophisticated thing to be. Free Trade does offer an alternative to dealing with exploitative unions in the U.S., plus it prevents the Black Marketeering resulting from tariffs and other import restrictions. But after considering the ramifications of Free Trade for the past two decades, I have changed my mind. The reason: market economies like ours seek out the lowest costs, and more and more often, the lowest costs are not in our country.As it turns out, America is having done to it what it did to Europe during the 19th and 20th centuries. Back then our labor and productivity was better than the nations we were selling to because we were developing: now new developing nations do the same thing to us. A job that pays the rent, values your expertise and reliability, and is plentiful enough to quit, most likely involves manufacturing. We don’t have many of those kind of jobs anymore: we sent them overseas so that The Rich could get richer and things are cheaper. This undermining goes under the title of “Free Trade.” Unfortunately, we have a huge portion of our population whose capabilities are limited to the kind of jobs that we are losing, so we end up supporting them via the social safety net. Free Trade is definitely not free.The trade-off is owning more stuff or employment. If given the chance to choose, most working Americans would choose employment but the “Free” Trade purveyors have some persuasive arguments why workers in other countries should benefit from American largess, and that new jobs are created back home due to “Free” Trade, even though for any job created, many more have been lost. America is not one-with-the-World: we are our own economic system, our people are ambitious, and our culture is different. We’re certainly willing to work with the World but not to our detriment. So, if the goal is “jobs,” then we know where to get them: take them back from the foreigners we gave them to. Get rid of Minimum Wage & restrictive union rules, and redistribute the wealth from the Nouveau Aristocracy via subsidies to people making less than it costs to live. It would no longer be cheaper for a business to off-shore, so the people who make all the money from off-shoring would redistribute to the low wage workers, and rest of us would still get all the cost benefits that off-shoring brings. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-17_57_free_trade.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-17_57_free_trade.mp3 4:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash free trade, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 07 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the new batch of original ideas you have heard since the last time: Business's only business is to make money. A business's primary goal is to become a monopoly, and it's government's job to stop them. America can trace its success directly to entrepreneurs. Government should keep close watch on Big Business & leave Small Business alone. Taxes should be on people, not business. Employees are not partners in business, they're allies. Minimum Wage is at the expense of jobs. A Liberty society cannot force individuals to give what others consider a Living Wage. Jobs have an implict value to society: productivity, quality of life, even defense. There are no mystical “job creators” but government can help create them. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-17_56_new_concepts_vol_5.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-17_56_new_concepts_vol_5.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 05 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Our liberty society uses Market Forces to create most jobs because Market Forces improve efficiency & productivity through a random process euphemistically called Creative Destruction or Reallocation of Resources, but the fact is millions of jobs go away every year and approximately the same number are created. In good times, more are created, and less in a recession, but there’s always more folks wanting jobs then jobs available, even in good times. 60-70 million people in the U.S. are unemployed, perhaps as many as 30 million of those people are out-of-work-but-would-work-if-they-could-get-it, and most of those people are incompetent to do anything but sew garments or hoe tomatoes. You can't "train" them out of the situation they're in, and lowering the standard of living for people on government assistance isn't the answer.Some people, conscious of their own entrenched self-interest, claim that jobs come from mystical job-creators, and if government just removed regulations & allowed those special people to do as they please, there would be plenty of jobs... And unicorns too. We could probably slow the job exodus if we turned back the clock on wages, safety, monopolies, education, environment & all the things that society wants, I assume that’s what Conservatives are advocating, but our liberty nation decides what we want through democracy, and our citizens think those protected things are important, so business will simply have to accommodate the rules we set. Job creation is going to need to be a combination of Market Forces, regulations & government stimulus. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-16_55_job_creation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-16_55_job_creation.mp3 2:51 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash job creation, jobs, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 03 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The word “job” carries a lot of intangibles: income, security, pride, identity, retirement & healthcare. There is the myth that once Americans worked most of their careers at a single employer, lived comfortably Middle Class, and retired with a gold watch while still admiring their boss. Whether that's true or not, it glamorized work ethic & increased productivity. Work ethic is important on several fronts: as a natural resource, to minimize resentment from those who do work & to economically balance consumption with production.During most of America’s history, tariffs, quotas, and some kind of trade balancing was maintained. However, job flight occurred when those barriers were removed in the mid-1990s, along with deregulation. The benefits being cheaper & cheaper goods paying lower & lower wages, called “the race to the bottom.” How many people do you know today who are willing to pay more for a shirt made in the U.S. versus a significantly cheaper one made in Vietnam? As Steve Jobs famously said, “those jobs ain't comin' back.”But the jobs issue is much, much bigger than who's out of work today because ever increasing automation will continue to eliminate low-skilled jobs, regardless. A huge unemployed leisure class seems impossible to maintain for long if people become consumptive without also learning to be productive, so some kind of paradigm shift that focuses on keeping people working must occur. Though it seems obvious, public works projects would do the trick: old-time pyramid building, aqueduct construction, Appian roads & moon landings would keep everyone employed who wanted to be, and all the ephemeral things that go with having a job. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-16_54_jobs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-16_54_jobs.mp3 3:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash jobs, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 01 Feb 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There's a huge difference between Minimum Wage and Living Wage but Living Wage promoters intentionally confuse their intentions with the much easier to defend Minimum Wage argument. In the case of Minimum Wage, you rely on people's sense of outrage & rejection of extreme exploitation, but Living Wage is a liberty verses socialism argument that would normally only be accepted by a small segment of the population. Minimum Wage people are thinking “enough money to buy lunch,” but Living Wage champions espouse “human dignity,” which usually involves a nice place to live, wi-fi, privacy, clothes, transportation, and other things they deem important to a person's self-esteme. Of course, it's totally subjective: what's one person's essentials is another person's luxory.Living Wage is another attempt to switch government's responsibility onto business. Market Forces are a proven method of solving complex interactions like wages, especially when combined with Welfare since the cost of Welfare comes out of General Tax receipts, meaning that The Rich pay to help The Poor, rather than the Middle Class who would normally have to shoulder the burden of artificially high wages. Market Forces will beat a Top-Down-Grand-Design every time. Also, government is a terrible teacher, mentor, or life coach. It would be better if there were more entry level jobs, and the subsequent "real world" aspects they bring. However, even with these unassialable arguments, a Europe-like “Living Wage” political majority probably will emerge over time: the concept is just too sensitive to demogogery. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-16_53_living_wage.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-16_53_living_wage.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash living wage, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 30 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The politics behind Minimum Wage is intentionally confused & emotionally charged, touching as it does on people's outrage, chartible inclinations, resentment towards business, and savior complex. Appealing to people's sensibilities, the basic argument is that an hour's work should be at least enough to buy a meal at Taco Bell. In a narrow context, that's a pretty compelling argment, even to a liberty ideolog. And it would take extraordinary leverage to get someone to take a job that pays less than that because truly poor people can get government assistance, though thoughts of exploiting the plight of illegal immigrants come to mind.Minimum Wage has a pedestrian appeal that is quite difficult to refute because the ramifications of a Minimum Wage are also quite fuzzy: most people can't comprehend that there are some jobs that simply are not worth the cost of paying someone to do. In a liberty society, government can’t force a customer to pay more than the market will bear for goods and services without grossly distorting and eventually ruining the economy. There are plenty of examples of protectionism in history & in Europe today to prove this assertion, and we need only look back to the 1970s Price Controls in America to see a homegrown example.If the choice is between employers paying the low wage the job is worth & letting government assistance cover the difference, or not having the job at all, keeping the job is clear to calculate: an unemployed person would get more government assistance than an employed person, plus the training, plus the work ethic, plus the fitting into society. Also, Minimum Wage forces people into the underground economy where there is no Minimum Wage, no withholding & no worker protections. Plus it inspires a contempt for government & people-who-know-better-than-you. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-16_52_minimum_wage.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-16_52_minimum_wage.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash minimum wage, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 28 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Though some employees are entrepreneurs just waiting for their chance, most people are not cut out to run a business: way too much work, stress, risk & a high chance of failure. And there's a fundamental ideological difference between entrepreneurs & employees, a liberty vs. socialism schism, because socialists see the employees of a business as partners, while entrepreneurs interpret the relationship as allies. Plus, socialists see employees as having some kind of Right to their job but business owners aren't looking for a random partner when they hire someone. In fact, if a machine can do the job, all the better. It's the old are you responsible for yourself or is someone else responsible for you question.For example: there are persistent calls by socialist thinkers to make business your nanny, but owners are not responsible for your well-being, that's Government's job. Business executives don't want to worry about your child care, or your healthcare, or whether you vote. Those are all important functions of society totally within the purview of Government. Want public childcare? Subsidize it. No time to vote? Vote-by-mail. Same with the employer's contribution to Social Security & Medicare: those simply put the burden on business for something that is a public concern. Social Security & healthcare should come out of General tax receipts because we all benefit from the spoils of a vibrant society & commerce, so let those who benefit the most, The Rich, bear the lion's share of the cost. Right now it is the Middle Class who ends up paying when the burden is on business.Democracy is how we settle this, but the danger of democracy is socialism, and since entrepreneurship is relatively rare, employees definitely are in the majority. And people are motivated by the basest of emotions, envy being a big one, and resentment against "The Boss" is granddaddy of them all, but luckily, the American Dream that anyone can get rich, and the fact that we all have Smartphones, keeps most employees allied with business, just like liberty wants them to be. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-16_51_employees.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-16_51_employees.mp3 3:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash employees, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 26 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Some things are so familiar we overlook their elegance: case-in-point, business is the perfect economic machine. Business allows for commerce to flourish, creates jobs, inspires innovations, and fuels an economy. The more productive business is, the better off society is. However, business is also an easy target for politicians & demogogues. It's mostly immune to attack, and doesn't fight back on a personal level but it doesn’t make sense for government to tax business, putting a damper on the engine that keeps it all going.Since taxing business is counter-productive, instead tax the people who own the business, not some imaginative legal construction that enhances our lives. Make businesses pay all yearly profit to their owners then tax the owners with a progressive Income Tax. As usual for pass-through taxes, use quarterly withholding so that the income cannot escape the country to foreign owners. Additionally, businesses don't need to accumulate money, they can operate from bank line-of-credit, use private loans, or sell stock. It's good for the banking system, and business can't hide their income in tax havens overseas. It also gets rid of the ridiculous double-taxation on dividends.Taxes should be on people because people ultimately get the benefit, and businesses certainly are not people. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-15_50_no_business_taxes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-15_50_no_business_taxes.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash business taxes, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 24 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Big business is differentiated from small business by its offloading of risk to public investors. The stock market is open to everyone, and as democratic as the proposition seems, where everyone has an equal chance to participate in the capitalist dream, in reality it results in a giant lottery where total novices are regularly fleeced by knowledgeable insiders. Big business has their investors and their employees at the complete mercy of management, and their shareholders are powerless, ripe for exploitation & abuse, exactly the kind of protections which governments are supposed to provide.Owning a small business is the American dream. Fortunately, Americans are optimistic people because odds are their small business is in for tough times. Every politician talks about encouraging small business but almost no politicians know what they are talking about. Let me break the news to them: small businesses fail. Even the “successful” ones are failures if you divide the profit by the time, money & commitment the owners put into them. Most long-term profit that small business owners take when they retire is simply the accumulated cash value of the tens of thousands of unpaid hours sunk into the business over decades of unrewarded labor. My favorite small business saying is, "I only make a buck an hour but I make up for it in hours.”Ultimately, government has little place in small business, but it is definitely needed to provide protection of stockholders and workers in big business. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-15_49_big_business_v_small_business.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-15_49_big_business_v_small_business.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash big business, small business, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 22 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Ambition is the alchemy of greed , vanity & pride, the basic fuel society runs on. America's liberty environment nurtures the desire to start your own business, build it, wallow in its success, despair in its failure. It becomes job, hobby, entertainment & identify. The lowliest street vendor finds more satisfaction in their career than anyone working in a cubical. Entrepreneurship is the catalyst of small & large business alike. Immigrants come from all around the world in pursue of it. Nothing defines the American Dream more than a striving entrepreneur. Entrepreneurs also have an overabundant helping of naive optimism, otherwise they would never even pursue their dream against such long odds. Their hope overcomes history & facts. They work at levels of productivity that no employer would ever attain from a captive workforce. That's why most entrepreneurs are young, because the innocent eagerness hasn't been beaten out of them yet, and their focus still has not been captured by other aspects of society like family & reputation. America's success rests on the backs of entrepreneurs, young & old, clever & perseverant, colorblind & tone deaf.There is a significant component of the Left, the strong socialists bordering on Marxists, who denigrate entrepreneurship. They associate it with selfishness, competitiveness & aggression, which is true because those are the ingredients of any good entrepreneur, but the naysayers are simply expressing their own envy, spite & resentment. On-the-other-hand, many of these same anti-entrepreneurs have a place in their heart for food carts, small-scale organic growers & folk jewelry-makers who are obviously entrepreneurs. Interestingly, today's modern entrepreneurs & anti-entrepreneurs alike congregate together in the great Western port cities of Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco & San Diego in a vibrant cultural mishmash, but entrepreneurs are everywhere if you just look for them. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-15_48_entrepreneurship.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-15_48_entrepreneurship.mp3 3:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash entrepreneurship, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 20 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The implicit goal of every business is to become a monopoly: they can't be faulted for it because their obligation is to maximize profits and a monopoly is the premiere agency to do so. Collusion & complicity among businesses are essentially monopolies, and some things, like health care, are natural monopolies. Monopolies are the Achilles heel of Capitalism because monopolies stifle Market Forces & distort the customer-business negotiation relationship. It takes government intervention to prevent them.At the end of the 19th Century, monopolies nearly turned America into an oligarchy, but right-person-at-the-right-time Teddy Roosevelt became the premiere “Trust Buster,” anti-monopolist. Since then, business has slowly compromised the regulatory agencies & public opinion, so monopolies, in the guise of telecoms, Main-Stream-Media, and too-big-to-fail institutions, have crept back, to the detriment of the American people. The oligarchy is returning: it is time to reassert government's role of reigning in the monopolies. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-15_47_monopolies.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-15_47_monopolies.mp3 2:06 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash monopolies, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 18 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy With liberty, what you do is your own business, and when you do that with other people, we call that “business” too. If you own a business, you are a Capitalist, and the rewards of your business go to you, and naturally tend to accumulate because that's what you want. This self-perpetuating self-interest is why Capitalism is a good match for liberty. And since business also provides jobs for those who are not Capitalists, it works for everybody. Business also provides other benefits, like technology, identity, and efficiency. Indeed, anything that unduly hinders business is bad for America.Businesses rely of the Rule Of Law which sets expectations. It essentially guarantees those going into business will be held to a detailed set of rules that can be adjudicated in Court, and those rules can only change through the democratic process. There are no additional subjective moral, ethical, or parochial obligations that would have unknown impact on business, and the only goal of business is to make money for the owners, which is why Government is in an adversarial relationship with business, to ensure that business serves the nation, not the other way around. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-15_46_business.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-15_46_business.mp3 2:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash business, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review more original ideas you have heard listening to me since the last time we reviewed: Health insurance is not healthcare & healthcare is a natural monopoly because it does not respond to Market Forces A nation's natural resources are too important to leave in the hands of self-interested, short-sighted private interests. Conservation puts people first while Environmentalism is mysticism. Climate Change politics is a bid for socialist control. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. Political Parties try to benefit from their leverage as much as any private business does. The 2-Party system is primitive & unreprentative. Conservatives are typically the entrenched winners & liberals often only want change for personal gain. Simple majority voting is the closest thing to liberty & also liberty's greatest threat. Only people should be able to give campaign contributions. By their very nature, Special Interests oppose liberty. Half of us are incompentent & only a minority of the population pull everyone else along. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-14_45_new_concepts_vol_4.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-14_45_new_concepts_vol_4.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 14 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The fact that over half of Americans receive some kind of government assistance is prima facie evidence that people of average intelligence can't survive without help; not to mention the people receiving assistance from their family or church, or aren't on assistance but should be. We have to be aware that many, many people are incompetent to compete in our modern technological society. Back-in-the-day when there were unskilled jobs, low technology & paternalism, more folks would have blended in but not now. Worse, even a high-IQ child raised in a low-IQ home will be dysfunctional. Add to that the large component of the population that is underage, taking psych meds, disabled, incarcerated, traumatized, etc., and it's a shitshow where a minority of the population basically carry the rest on their backs. I know this concept isn't palatable to many people's internal narrative but that doesn't change the fact that lots of folks have economic, medical or social difficulties, or all three. These people don't have bank accounts & couldn't write a check if they did, and they have to use debit cards, if they can even get one. Their financial manager is the cashier at the Payday loan place. Plus, most are overweight, and have other health problems, and a lot are estranged from their family, and their only friends are bartenders & smoke-buddies. They can't make anything like a rational decision: it's stream-of-consciousness living. This estimate doesn't even include the irrational & ill-informed or those with the Millennial-generation mindset of no Life Goals that will "only do something meaningful.” And often people that seem to have it together are actually in trouble with one or more aspects of their life but they have the money to hire the necessary expertise to cover the deficit. Examine anyone too closely & you'll find one or two major faux pas: medical, finances, legal, that if not handled adequately is going to ruin a person's life. People without the same economic means to handle complicated situations in their life should be able to get some help but we can't train personal responsibility, independence or competence. Who does the training? What if the training fails? What is the training? This is a problem of tremendous magnitude. I'm not speaking from contempt, I'm just laying out the groundwork for the situation our country has to deal with and doesn't because, really, the only solution is government intervention, and before you knee-jerk that it's not government's job to be every citizen's wingman, remember that they're here too and there's a lot more of them than there are of you. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-14_44_incompetence.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-14_44_incompetence.mp3 3:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash incompetence, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 12 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Governments are by definition, socialist, meaning their obligation is to do what is best for everybody. Special Interests are by definition, selfish, meaning they seek to promote particular issues regardless of their effects. It seems bizzare & ironic that the two are in such close proximity, or that Government would even allow itself to be compromised by such obvious conflicts, but governments are run by people, and people are grasping opportunists.Special Interests use the fact that deciding what is "best for everybody" is done a small cadre of elites that can, unfortunately, be relatively easily captured because only those few people need to be corrupted. This is especially true when they are lobbied by former insiders: people who are owed favors & know where all the bodies are buried.Special Interests also control which candidates end up on the General ballot because of their power to deliver a block of votes, essentially making their candidate unassialable in the Primary election when turnout is low & small numbers are statistically important. And Special Interests dominate the political Parties, controlling the flow of information, mentoring, connections & money. An aspirating candidate, no matter how independent, capable or experienced, is no candidate at all really if they can't get elected.In every election cycle there is an outcry by aspiring candidates against “special interests,” but for most candidates either their complaint is simply melodramatics or they are hypocritically uninformed because it is easy to tell which Special Interests that candidate represent: simply look at their endorsement & contributor lists. Only the incredibly naïve would not think that every endorser expects to get something in return for their endorsement. In fact, every endorsement was gained by the candidate tacitly agreeing to the terms of the Special Interest because almost all Special Interests require questionnaires to be filled out to the endorser’s satisfaction. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-14_43_special_interests.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-14_43_special_interests.mp3 3:10 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash special interests, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 10 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Campaign finance has a consequence vs. causation aspect about it: do candidates win because they get lots of money, or do winning candidates get lots of money? At the national level, it certainly seems to be the latter because many, many candidates spend vasts amount of money for seemingly inconsequential elections which they then lose. However, it is true that candidates who are unknown with no resources have little chance of convincing people to vote for them.It is important to know who “owns” a candidate, so mandating disclosing of who gives what to whom is clearly valuable to our democracy: we need to know if foreign nationals are supporting particular candidates with possibly nefarious motives. And businesses should not be able to contribute to campaigns at all: if the owners of a business wish to own candidates that promote their business, they should have to support them under their real name.The specious argument that businesses have Free Speech needs to be definitively counteracted with legislation since the Supreme Court seems unable to do so. Only people are people: the fictional device our country uses to facilitate commerce, business, has no Rights, is not protected by The Constitution, and has no place in politics. On-the-other-hand, putting campaign contribution caps on private individuals is a limitation of Free Speech. Democracy is constantly threatened by Marxism, and in the absence of debate, the poor many will vote to take the rich few's stuff. Campaign donation caps laws are intended to mute the rich, clearly a violation of their liberty. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-14_42_c_aign_finance.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-14_42_c_aign_finance.mp3 2:10 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash campaign finance, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 08 Jan 2024 16:52:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Voting holds almost mystical reverence among seekers of liberty but there is no Right to vote, only injunctions against discrimination if there happens to be a vote. Since the manipulation of voters & the mechanics of voting offers control, it is under constant pressure from vested interests. Intentional voter suppression hides behind Voter ID laws, redistricting & old technology. Conservatives want voter restrictions because more voters, especially new voters, could change the status quo. In contrast, the Left often proposes Mandatory voting for everyone under the guise of “civic duty.”Demagogues, both Left & Right, emanate a strong paternalistic undercurrent, where the idea of a democracy is besmirched by comparisons of voters to “the great unwashed,” that your vote doesn't mean anything, and there is a deep suspicion that the other side has rigged the process somehow. They point out the problems of voting, that there are a lot of people who do not have the capacity to make good decisions: the young, feeble, mentally ill & stupid. And there is a large portion of Americans who don't much like democracy: they would prefer the proles were ruled by a knowledgeable elite class. To these people, and there are a lot of them, democracy seems like irresponsible selfish people getting away with their hedonistic ways.Voting can be adulterated, making it less democratic: for example, there are some decisions that require a super-majority, like two-thirds of the vote, but the further the needed majority is from 50%, the further it is from liberty. And there are often calls to tie voting to military or public service thereby limiting enfranchisement. Special Interests are often so sure of their crusades that they propose that only “informed” citizens can vote, assuming that informed voters would vote their way. Some people want to put the cost of voting on business, as if business is responsible for the proper functioning of society rather than Government.Given these disincentives, indoctrination of our youth to the advantages of liberty, democracy, and voting seems to be the primarily method of maintaining American ideology. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_41_voting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_41_voting.mp3 3:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash voting, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 06 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Liberal in one dictionary sense means empowerment, often through a broad education but also by expanding one's sophistication & self-actualization. Conservative is simply the word that means comfortable & familiar, leading to a reticence towards change. Self-interest is the motivating factor of both & certainly people can be both liberal & conservative in different aspects of their life. Measuring someone's general acceptance of change determines what label best applies to them. In general, a conservative is simply a person who finds it in their best interest to maintain the status quo, usually as an entrenched winner who has more chance of their position being eroded than enhanced, while a liberal perceives change as an opportunity to improve their station in life, and is therefore willing to take more chances, which is why “change” is always a prominent word of the liberal's lexicon. The other definition of “liberal” means liberty but conservatives can believe in liberty just as fervently so we will leave that out of this particular discussion.There may even be an evolutionary component of conservative verses liberal behavior. One could imagine a variety of narratives that could support such an argument but no need to add mystic thinking to an already self-explanatory reason: potential gain verses potential loss, and once someone is in the conservative mindset then momentum, tradition & custom are logic enough for them to refuse to consider any other alternatives. Similarly, liberal thinkers tend to go overboard in their denial of past attitudes, methods & motivations of doing things. If you do not want to be trapped by either extreme, a simple rule-of-thumb is: be conservative when things are working & liberal when they're not. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_40_liberal_v_conservative.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_40_liberal_v_conservative.mp3 3:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberal, conservative, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 04 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy America initiated the modern nation Democracy business, and its founders warned against and disdained political parties but it wasn't long before pragmatism set in and Thomas Jefferson himself co-founded the Democratic Party. Because America was first, and because there was no thought nor experience of political parties, the natural course of events was a winner-takes-all default 2-Party system. This is the simplist of solutions but has the glaring defect that second-place-is-the-first-loser & so nobody but the people in power get much of a say. For a country founded on representation, we sure didn't end up with much. But since elections in the U.S. tend to be a lottery, and as lotteries go the Party in power tends to change a lot so people have been mollified.Because of our lame 2-Party system, strange bedfellows are forced upon us since every person must be wedged into one of the two Parties whether their ideas coincide or not. The Parties can't even be divided liberal vs. conservative because they have changed over time: a 150 years ago, Democrats used to be the conservatives, and Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, was a raging liberal. It's virtually impossible to be elected without a "D" or "R" next to your name, so "independents" declare they are in one of the two Parties, however, the Party power structure does not support them: no money, no help, no organization, and tries to defeat them with a Party stalwart in the Primary.Most nations that formed into democracies after America instituted various forms of more inclusive representation, such as a parlimentary system, but the U.S. has the advantage of being the only liberity nation, so people are less affected by the decisions of a handful of elites at the top than socialist-leaning nations experience. Also our clear winner has a dictator-like ability to control the direction America is going, at least until the next clear winner is elected. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_39_2-party_system.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_39_2-party_system.mp3 3:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash 2-party system, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 02 Jan 2024 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Political Parties are semi-private organizations that are only interested in the self-centered desires of their rulers, just like any other private organization, regardless of their portrayal of themselves wrapped in an American flag. Their goals are selfish, the methods they practice are dishonest, and the candidates they run are compromised. I know lots of people have always suspected this but I’ve been idealistic, and thought the problem was that just not enough “good” people were getting involved, so I got involved: political Parties do not want “good” people, they want their people.And it gets scarier: candidates keep campaign donations. I always wondered how part-time State legislators earning $35K/yr ended up retiring with millions? Every dollar some poor slob who barely makes the mortgage is wheedled into giving to a candidate is a transfer of wealth from the poor to the soon-to-be rich. As for business campaign contributions, that's out-and-out bribery: business is in business to make money, period, and a business pays a political candidate to do what they want, also period. And to top it all off: slander, libel & privacy laws don't apply to political candidates. That means the opposing side can say whatever they want to discredit a rival. "Thief!" "Liar!" "Child molester!" And these accusations can come from secret sources paid for by secret money. It's open season on folks who would otherwise be your doctor, lawyer or accountant, and now want to represent you in congress. How can any kind of professional in your community survive those kinds of unsubstantiated stains on their reputations? At the beginning of America, political Parties were thought to be the scourge of partisanship & self-dealing, and they certainly live up to the expectation. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_38_political_parties.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_38_political_parties.mp3 2:58 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash political parties, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 31 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The term “Social Security” has entered that realm of preconception and symbolism that defies rational logic. The very mention of the word evokes fear in some, antagonism is others, and all feel a vague sense of unease. Almost no day goes by without some mention of Social Security: either in the newspaper, on television, a brochure in the mail, or a political event. Politicians especially abuse the feelings and imagery of the term, most often misleadingly, sometimes lying, always exploitive. That is what makes it difficult for a real message to get out there, because everything has been said, and there seems to be nothing new to offer. However, here is a fact I have never heard mentioned…We are told that the Baby-Boomers are going to need an exorbitant amount of Social Security, so the deduction has been raised, and supposedly put in a “Social Security Trust Fund.” This is blatantly misleading, almost a lie. Instead, the extra money is spent as part of the General disbursements. Treasury Bonds are then issued purporting to represent the fund but they are just words, there is no money. When the Baby-Boomers need the money, it will not be available. The U.S. budget is already in a huge deficit so new taxes will need to be imposed to raise the money to cover cashing in those bonds. What that means is that people are paying twice for the same thing: first they paid into the “trust” fund then pay again to cover cashing the bonds.What makes it more horrendous is that Social Security is subtracted from subsistence level paychecks. In fact, Medicare is subtracted from the first dollar someone earns. There are no Social Security exemptions, no brackets, and no refunds. The poorest of the working poor pay Social Security, yet people in the highest monetary echelons of society can draw it. They use it to pay their golf fees, and tip the doorman. Also, well-paid people have a cap on how much they have to pay every year. The reason for this travesty is that Social Security is really socialized retirement but it is not truthfully presented as such. People are told the money they pay into Social Security is theirs, that the government is just holding it until they get old. Everybody is hurt by this misrepresentation. Right now we put people who use drugs in jail but not the liars who are destroying the public’s image and faith in what should be the great benefit of financial security in old age. The solution is to fully socialize Social Security so only the people who need it get it, called Means Testing, pay out of General Tax receipts, and especially stop First Dollar withholding. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_37_social_security.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_37_social_security.mp3 4:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social security, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 29 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy I am of the certain opinion that we at least ought to have contingency plans in case the climate changes for the worse. There is sufficient scientific evidence that the earth goes through frequent, in geological time, episodes of warming or cooling, that it is now in a warming cycle, and that the onset is being accelerated by human pollution. What to do & whether to do it & who has to do it are the real questions behind the political reality of Climate Change. The political demagoguery that we are experiencing is suspect because the people pushing for change have exhibited corrupt motivations & dubious intellectual honesty, especially at the international level. The rest of the world wants America muzzled, mostly due to reasons of envy, resentment, and socialist zeal, and if we let their apologists in America triumph, the specter of Climate Change will be the club used to beat us down.And the homegrown Climate Changers tend to be an eclectic group of people-who-know-better-n-me: there's folks who want to stop ranching, and folks against cars, and folks against single-family dwellings, and folks against ornamental yards, and folks who want to put it to business, and folks who want to open the borders to refugees, and folks who just want to redistribute American wealth... But folks who plan for the supposed coming apocalypse? Not so much.Even though I've been convinced that there will probably be substantial changes in the climate in at least parts of the U.S. during my lifetime, what do we do? First, determine what damage Climate Change is going to bring to America. Do populations need to migrate? Do pipelines need to be built? Does energy need to become self-sufficient? My informed opinion is that monitoring with adaptation as needed is the best Climate Change course of action rather than trying to predict the future, and there is the very real possibility that there is nothing we can do will stop what's coming, which also supports the "adapt" argument, rather than submitting to an overarching Climate Change World Authority. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_36_climate_change.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_36_climate_change.mp3 3:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash climate change, global warming, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 27 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy As a person who cares about the environment more than sport or short-term monetary gain, I consider myself a “conservationist.” That was the name applied to my beliefs when instilled as a child, and as yet hasn’t changed in meaning. The seminal guardian angel of nature in the United States was Theodore Roosevelt, a man of particular turn-of-the-last-century destiny. Not only did Teddy establish the Forest Service, and make “Conservation as a National Duty” part of his presidential platform, he actually created the political climate that allowed him to do those things by founding the Boone & Crockett Club, which was instrumental in preparing and getting conservation legislation passed. Roosevelt, as well, piqued the public's imagination through prodigious conservation writings in books and magazines. No person has had a more thorough belief in the importance of nature, its value, and its future, combined the political expertise, will-power, and perseverance to protect it, saying "conservation means not only preservation of natural resources, but the prevention of the monopoly of natural resources, so they should inhere in the people as a whole." However, there is a distinct difference between Teddy’s “conservationist” and today’s “environmentalist.” Wikipedia is the best source of the popular notion of environmentalism: “Environmentalism as a movement covers broad areas of institutional oppression.” Theodore Roosevelt's name is never mentioned. On the other hand, going to Wikipedia again, we find a definition of “conservation” that Teddy and I would agree with: “Chiefly in the United States, conservation is seen as differing from environmentalism in that it aims to preserve natural resources expressly for their continued sustainable use by humans.” And BTW, Theodore Roosevelt is prominently mentioned. That pretty much sums it up: conservationism is respectful of liberty while environmentalism is socialist claptrap. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_35_conservation_v_environmentalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_35_conservation_v_environmentalism.mp3 3:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash conservationist, environmentalism, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 25 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy We are at the mercy of our environment: no water, no air, no food, no us. These particular things can all be leveraged, exploited & abused if owned by private interests, which makes the environment a socialized function, meaning the needs of the group supercede the wants of an individual. Other natural resources, the ones responsible for maintaining our computer-lifestyle, may be privately owned but they must be closely regulated by government to monitor the effects on the biosphere, from such things as mining, harvesting, pesticides, and the other social costs of procurement. Benefits cannot accure to the individual at the cost to society.On-the-other-hand, the environment is not mystical but something to benefit humans. When the debate wanders into topics like “organic,” “animal Rights” or “it's for the children,” beware self-righteous exclamations of outrage & calls for protection. People as a group aren't motivated to act by the effemeral needs & desires of somebody else's grandkids, and sanctimonious bleating about what is good for the future is nothing more than self-delusion & an attempt at control. Unfortunately, any discussion of the environment often comes up in this context. No species has a need to exist for any other reason than that humans are reassured when they do. The outdoors is not reserved for anything but humans, and other creatures are nothing more than organic robots & have no Rights nor are humans responsible to them. It's only our live-n-let-live liberal ideology & the concept of conservation that have any claim on us at all. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_34_the_environment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-13_34_the_environment.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash government, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 23 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy One of the reasons people join a tribe is to be taken care of if they are sick or injured. Healthcare for its citizens at the national level was first introduced in 19th Century Germany, and in fact, during the early 20th Century in the United States one of Teddy Roosevelt’s Party platforms was universal healthcare. Slowly, the advanced nations of the world stumbled into universal healthcare over the next century, most after the Second World War, but America waited until recently to provide not healthcare, but health insurance, to its citizens.The distinction between healthcare & health insurance is an important one because the only people without universal healthcare in America is the Middle Class: the “poor” have it, the rich have it, public employees have it, the military & veterans have it, the elderly have it, even prisoners have it. Only wage-earners must pay monthly premiums & after a high deduction, insurance will cover the cost of catastrophic healthcare. It's more a lottery than healthcare, and makes little sense except in political terms. There were simply too many players: doctors, insurers, lawyers, administrators & entrepreneurs who are complicit in the status quo.Socializing healthcare would be the best solution, where healthcare costs are paid out of regular taxes with no insurance middle-man. This works in other countries but Americans are suspicious of socialism & prefer a Market Forces solution. However, Market Forces only work when there is an adversarial relationship among all the parties involved: workers, owners, customers, to keep each other in check. A Market solution for healthcare has not been forthcoming for the simple reason that healthcare is not a voluntary commodity: you will pay any amount of money if your son is going to lose his eye. And the knowledge required to make informed, considered choices is extraordinarily arcane, not to mention that medicine is all mixed up with mysticism, making healthcare choices highly subjective and subject to exploitation.Liability issues in healthcare are also unreasonably avaricious because of the emotions involved, and healthcare union workers use the same exploitative rhetoric. The stakes are so high and the players so entrenched that healthcare is a virtual trust, impossible to break, and also impossible to ignore. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-11_33_healthcare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-11_33_healthcare.mp3 3:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash health care, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 21 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review another batch of original ideas: Unions should not be exempt from anti-monopoly laws. Public Employee unions are against the public interest. The Teachers Union puts teachers before students. “Personalized Education” options focus on the student, not the teacher. School Vouchers are the first step to education reform. Charter Schools are liberty-centric because they offer choice. Home-Schooling should be integrated into public education. Self-Paced Online learning will allow students to achieve remarkable heights of knowledge. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-11_32_even_more_new_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-11_32_even_more_new_concepts.mp3 2:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash education reform, vouchers, school, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 19 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Learning comes from within: students "teach" themselves, at their own rate, which is completely the opposite the concept of teachers. At some point in most people's lives there is a yearning for learning but it gets snuffed out by the inhumanity of didactic education where students are grouped by age, subject to calendar years, and sit at a desk in a common physical location pretending to listen to droning lectures. Self-paced learning, at home or in a common space, using the best interactive materials and prompted by facilitators would be best method of learning for the majority of students of all ages. With self-paced learning, they can study as short or as long as they like, whereever they like. If their home environment is not conducive to learning then they can go the public school grounds or somewhere else: no clocks, calendars, due dates, or test dates, and assessments are integrated into the lessons. It is irrational to think you have ever had a single teacher of better quality than the very best on the Internet. Self-paced learning also has low per student cost, and the savings can be alloted to students having difficulty. Teaching recent immigrants & poor children might need more help but lots of "poor" children would excel in self-paced, especially if not forced into a public school environment, and the State's requirements can be satisfied from what student's are actually interested in.All the tools are in place for public access to self-paced Internet-based learning. There are some major programs building up from MIT & elsewhere, but for now the Teacher's unions, conservative thought & political correctness are major obstacles in the way of self-pace learning. If our goal is to see the American Dream in full force, take off the binders and talented kids will burst into the stratosphere, no matter what their background is. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-11_31_self-paced_learning.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-11_31_self-paced_learning.mp3 3:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash self-paced learning, education reform, vouchers, school, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 17 Dec 2023 08:17:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Home-schooling has great potential to cure part of the education conundrum and it should be integrated into the public education system. Home-schooling also proves that teachers are not needed for learning because moms aren't credentialed teachers, they're facilitators, but their kids by-n-large, turn out just fine. Home-schooled kids are typically kindergarten to 8th grade, learn any way they want which might mean nothing formal, and often it's entirely self-paced, showing that young children are just as amenable to self-paced learning as older kids.Home-Schooling has the disadvantage that some kids will get no sex education or not do organized sports. The truly egregious examples would be the ultra-religious, Moses on a dinosaur, mysticism-before-science dogma presented as fact to a child who is extremely vulnerable to indoctrination. Still, a lot of subjects are the same, and most other home-schoolers, the ones who simply don't like public schools, just need their Tiger-Moms to know what the public goals are, and they'll make sure their kids are ready & waiting. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-10_30_home-schooling.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-10_30_home-schooling.mp3 1:58 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash home-school, education reform, vouchers, school, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 12 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The argument for Charter Schools has lots of liberty-sounding rhetoric but it's actually an attempt to bypass the Teachers & other public employee unions. In reality, Charter Schools are no better as learning institutions than public schools because they still use the same traditional didactic teaching techniques of fixed time & place, orator & audience, with similar results. Public education proponents use this fact to point at Charter Schools and gleefully proclaim Charter Schools are a failure but they're missing the point, which is the opportunity for choice: parents & students have the choice of whether to attend a Charter School, for whatever private reasons they want. Choice is control, a very valuable human commodity indeed.Charter Schools do gain an amount of management & financial flexibility by escaping the union straight-jacket but for-profit Charter Schools leverage that flexibility to make money, and non-profit Charter Schools are overwhelmed with the same poor-performing students that overwhelm poorly-performing public schools. Also, Charter Schools often can't withstand the scrutiny attracted by the political grandstanding used to get them going. On-the-other-hand, the circle-the-wagons attitude of public schools & their School Board toadies preys on conservative fears in the local community, exploiting the reputation, respect & reverence that citizens hold for education. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-08_29_charter_schools.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-08_29_charter_schools.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash charter schools, education reform, education, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 10 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy As a society we have chosen to educate all of our children, everybody’s children, regardless of whose they are but we are failing: the current education system needs radical change. Markets respond to change by giving people a choice, and letting the optimum solutions evolve. In the education debate, “choice” is synonymous with vouchers but, unfortunately, the word “vouchers” has been poisoned to mean just another teacher droning in another school somewhere different in the city, and lots of people see vouchers as taxpayers funding private schools. The real value of Vouchers is the opportunity to completely change education as we know it, and “choice” is the first step.There are already a myriad of proven learning techniques that have evolved over the past decades: Montessori, Kaplan, Home-Schooling, Special Ed, vocational-training & Internet-based-self-paced-study are already out there, they only need to be integrated into a public framework so that public criteria & oversight are enforced. So long as a student can perform to a predefined standard, there's no reason government should demand a lot of control over how that education is provided, instead Government contracts should be written to specify educational standards & outcome then they pick bids, not based on dollars-per-student but education-per-student, so that if one technique or supplier doesn't work for your child, try another regardless of cost, your voucher is for an education: the one that works for you. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-06_28_school_vouchers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-06_28_school_vouchers.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash education reform, vouchers, school, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 08 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Didactic education, a teacher standing in front of a room of stationary students all intent on the teacher's every word, may be exhilarating to the teacher, but the concept is from the 15th Century, back when there was only one hand-written copy of a book & only a “teacher” could read it. Times have changed, the printing press was invented, videogames & the Internet provide access for everybody to everything. We need to move beyond providing Welfare to buggy-whip makers, and drag education kicking-and-screaming into the modern era.Education has public goals but one size does not fit all, that's why we need to open it up, we need private actors providing more options. The rise of the Western World wasn't a fluke, Market Forces work, and if we let them, Market Forces can determine the proper way to educate different kinds of students. What's needed is to break education out of the hands of Teachers Unions and put it into Market-Driven alternatives that offer a wide range of choices: self-paced, Kaplan, Montessori, Home Schooling, Socratic, vocational, Internet-based, and anything else creative entrepreneurs come up with, all integrated under one set of final objectives. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-04_27_education_reform.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-04_27_education_reform.mp3 2:04 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash education reform, education, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 06 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy No public employee union can compete with the Teachers Union in notoriety, prestige & raw power. The Teachers Union is everywhere in relatively large numbers, are socially integrated into the community, and have a direct connection to every family with children and every property owner who has to pay taxes for schools. Their voter turnout guarantees every school bond levee is passed, and if it does not pass the first time, they have the clout to resubmit it over & over until the opposition simply gives up. There is no other example of cynical power like that anywhere. And, of course, the only oversight is a token School Board, where the members are usually the parents of students, and totally in the thrall of Teachers Union. No arm of public employee power is more exemplary of the abuse & exploiting of the lack of negotiating power as the Teachers Union. Just consider the fact that even though Public Employees are barred by law from striking, the Teachers Union has no scruples in doing so, and without ramifications if the do. Teachers Unions have a fiduciary responsibility to utilize their leverage to maximum potential to promote the agenda of teachers, and they do: teachers unions are about teachers.But all of that is secondary to the stranglehold Teachers unions have on learning. For education in this country to advance out of the Dark Ages we need other options besides 15th Century sophistry, but Teachers Unions fight tooth & nail against anything that doesn't center around them. Home Schooling should be integrated into the public system, and there are a plethora of innovative educating techniques just waiting to get the opportunity to prove or disprove their viability, but teachers are against any other form of education that does not include “teachers,” and even teacher-based Charter schools face tremendous opposition from Teachers unions because they are marginally subject to Negotiation, such as opposing sides, feedback via accountability, and an adversarial relationship. In that environment, teachers can prove how much they're really worth.Teaching is the focus of the didactic type of learning, where one person controls the actions of many, which is obviously the opposite of liberty. It would be wonderful if we had a choice in how we & our children are educated. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-02_26_teachers_union.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-02_26_teachers_union.mp3 3:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash unions, teachers, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 04 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy “All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations.” - August 16, 1937, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the strongest union supporting president of all time.Obviously, intense & incessant lobbying overcame President Roosevelt's sage observations, and the nation is now in the seemingly inextricable grasp of public employee unions. If there is oligarchy in the U.S., the public employee unions would certainly be counted among them. They surely rank ahead of even large corporations in the public extortion racket. There's a huge difference between private sector & public employee unions, mostly to do with the lack of negotiating ability: there are no opposing party, there's no feedback mechanism, and there is no adversarial relationship because a Third Party, the taxpayer, bears the burden of the cost.Negotiation is not possible because Government is us, so who is the opposing party? The People? Elected officials? Appointed government employees? What is the feedback mechanism? Elections? Reneging on public debt? Bad press? And the contracts amount to little more than collusion against unrepresented taxpayers. What Public Employee unions call negotiation is little more than public employees debating other public employees about how much interest their retirement accounts should grow every year.Public Employee Unions have been able to exploit the special government bookkeeping to hide their true cost in outrageous unfunded future obligations, for which ultimately taxpayers will suffer the consequences. The perks are substantial: guaranteed hefty government pensions, job security, no one paying attention to what they do, and who's going to fire a public employee that is under-performing? What's the upside for the person doing the firing? No private business could participate in such a one-sided relationship because if they did, they wouldn't remain in business for long.But getting rid of Public Employee unions isn't to save money, it's to pull down the wall they've put up around education, parks, transportation projects, and every other thing they control with an iron grip. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-29_25_public_employee_unions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-29_25_public_employee_unions.mp3 4:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash public employee union, unions, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 02 Dec 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Many years ago unions were created to counteract uncontested employer exploitation. Private business is Capitalism with its focus on profits, so workers united as the only defense against the employer's might, and it worked. In fact, the Trade Unions were so successful at equalizing the playing field, both in a legal sense & in the public consciousness, that private union membership has been in decline ever since, because who wants to pay dues or have another level of management if they don't have to? But have no doubt, unions will come roaring back if the pendulum shifts off center.Americans support private unions, and most private unions get a pass from me because they are in an adversarial relationship with business: sometimes I'm on their side, sometimes I'm not, but que sera sera. Employees are no less subject to the base motives of resentment, envy & control than the managers at the companies they work for, so there's no side-of-the-angels here: either management or labor can be trying to exploit the other which is understandable, and as long as the negotiations are honest attempts, it's simply part of the Market Forces that keeps America advancing.Unions are exempted from anti-monopoly laws which is a disgrace because, unfortunately, some unions, like at the ports & railroads, often seem to be trying to leverage their monopolistic advantage. People don't like monopolies, so another generation of youth end up forming negative impressions of unions because of a few unscrupulous bad actors. Also, unions often try to justify their grabs for more power by complaining about the unequal power of business, and they have a point with some of the recent Supreme Court decisions, but the solution is not to make unions stronger, imposing even more liberty burden on private citizens, instead the focus should be on reducing the power of business. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-27_24_unions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-27_24_unions.mp3 3:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash unions, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 30 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review another batch of original ideas that you've probably never heard before: We have a Spend-n-Tax economy: taxes must repaid by the people who ended up with the loan money. High marginal tax rates inhibit extreme income inequality. Success in life is primarily a result of a lucktocracy. If nothing is done to stop it, wealth accumulates exponentially into the hands of the Nouveau Aristocracy. 100% Inheritance Tax gives budding entrepreneurs a chance & prevents a Nouveau Aristocracy. Negotiation requires 3 parts: opposing sides, feedback & an adversarial relationship Privatize all government services but oversight & those that only the State can perform. The 5 Socialized Government functions are defense, the environment, the law, healthcare & the social safety net. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-26_23_more_new_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-26_23_more_new_concepts.mp3 2:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash new concepts, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 28 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Government's function is leadership & oversight, and nothing makes people more unhappy then when Government seems to give preference to one person or group over another, therefore, by definition, Government is socialist because it must look out for the best interests of everyone. In contrast, during everyday American life, because we are a Liberty nation any question of priority always defaults to individual first. Not only were we raised with that ideology but it seems to work remarkably well in almost all circumstances, but there are a handful of activities that are important to the citizens of our nation that are best socialized, meaning the needs of the group supersede the wants of the individual.There are activities performed by government that could theoretically be privatized, but for some reason should not be. The most obvious activity socialized by government is, of course, defense. I can think of nothing more dangerous to a country's survival as a democracy than a private military. Then there are some things that simply cannot be left in private hands because the survival of all of us depend on them, like the environment. And there is the American mythology that we should all get equal opportunity, making us believe that everyone should access to & equal treatment under The Law. Healthcare is a natural monopoly because people don't have a legitimate Market Choice whether to receive it not, how much, which, when, or what. And no natural Market Forces exist to maintain a social safety net, that is almost purely a charitable function that The People of America have chosen to do, and so Government has to do itThe number of things socialized should remain small & must meet the stringent requirement of not being subject to normal market pressures. Indeed, socialism is a slippery slope because any amount of socialism encourages control-seekers to propose more. The last thing I want is confused people to use limited socialism as an excuse to decide what is best for me, therefore government expansion must be highly scrutinized, and not allowed into areas that could be performed by the private sector. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-23_22_socialized_functions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-23_22_socialized_functions.mp3 3:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialized functions, government, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 26 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Before Teddy Roosevelt was president, he was key in the enactment of Civil Service exams and meritorious hiring of public employees. Before him State-run services were inefficient & corrupt because every time a new Party took office, they fired everyone from the old Party and hired based on patronage. Now, however, the problem is entrenched Public Employee unions. There is no way to treat government agencies like private entrepreneurship due to lack of a negotiating position. Government jobs are spectacular in their inefficiency, inertia & lack of innovation. The simplest solution is to privatize most government services, and let Government's role be one of specification & oversight. Government should only perform services like watchdog, defense & the courts.Without proper negotiation, an organization cannot balance, it will get heavier & heavier on the side of self-dealing until it collapses. The U.S. is crumbling from the inside: those who get money from Government vs. those who pay for it. Over the long term, this self-dealing is the most dangerous threat to America: just the promised but unfunded public employee retirement obligations would turn taxpayers into serfs. Let private companies negotiate with their employees with collective bargaining, and if one side beats the other too far into failure then Government simply takes the next bidder in line. Privatization is not exactly the same as a Market Forces solution because there is no profit component, instead those companies that most closely match the specified objectives can procure a contractual relationship with government. Politicians define what those objectives are but businesses implement them. The advantage is that government remains flexible: they can experiment with alternative methods for education, policing, fire protection & safety, incarceration, public transportation, licensing & maintaining public areas. Methods & people that don't work out would be replaced by ones that do. There should certainly be no janitors, food servers, gardeners, or other Market Forces-driven sector of the private economy working directly for government because government should not be involved in true Markets at all. And since the private sector's focus is the wants of the few while government's job is the needs of the many, an adversarial relationship applies, making negotiation between them possible. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-21_21_privatize_government_services.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-21_21_privatize_government_services.mp3 3:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash privatize, government services, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 24 Nov 2023 08:25:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Negotiation requires three things: clearly articulated opposing positions where each side gains only at the expense of the other; feedback to monitor the outcome to check for adherence & adjust as necessary; and an adversarial relationship to ensure that there is no collusion against a poorly represented Third Party.Every negotiation requires diametrically opposed sides using their leverage for maximum return, and in this way the most efficient equilibrium is maintained. For example, “Mom lets one child cut the slices from a cake and lets the other child pick which slice.”Feedback is also a requirement for stability, because no circuit is simple enough that it can run unsupervised. Adjustments are spelled out in the contract, and post hoc excuses are not allowed.There is an obvious adversarial relationship between business & customers, employers & employees, Liberty & Autocracy. And always be suspicious of any negotiations that are not subject to an adversarial relationship: Public Employee unions being the most egregious, but so-called "public-private partnerships" are next on the list, followed closely by “tax incentives” and “Affirmative Action.”Negotiators have a fiduciary responsibility to act for maximum gain for the Party they represent, but if the mechanism penalizing compromised negotiators is weak then they may prosper more from betraying their clients than suffering the consequences: School Boards, regulatory agencies & other mechanisms of pseudo-public oversight fall into this category. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-19_20_negotiation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-19_20_negotiation.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash negotiation, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 22 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy In America you have the right to accumulate as much money as you possible can during your lifetime. You can spend it as frivolously, as consumptively, or as benevolently as you want. But you do not have the right to create a fiefdom for your heirs. If your sons & daughters have the merit to rebuild on your remaining empire after you're gone then all power to them, but they’re going to have to be almost as good or lucky as you were. Redistribution of wealth through inheritance taxes is not an ethical issue, it is essential to the stable continuation of this nation. It’s a matter of economics and predictable human response, not socialist moralizing.100% inheritance tax is the answer... Well, almost, you do have a reasonable expectation to give your immediate descendants a leg up on life, part of the lucktocracy, but that number would be a conscientious amount, enough that the heir would not have to work during their lifetime if they didn't want to. And the remaining money should not to go to government, but it does need to be redistributed to make way for the next generation of entrepreneurs, so let the decedent give away all their money in relatively small chunks to whoever they want, it was their money after all. For some wealthy people, that could be random, like all graduating students from MIT get a million dollars, or everybody named after the decedent has a reason to be happy about the legacy. How many kids named “Bill Gates” do you think would be born next year if that were the case? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-17_19_inheritance_taxes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-17_19_inheritance_taxes.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash inheritance taxes, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 20 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Every kid played Monopoly until they learned that somebody always got everything and they ended up out of the game. Real life is very similar, if the wealth is not redistributed it will accumulate in ever increasing amounts in the hands of the very few who have it. It’s a mathematical certainty that if you have a 1% advantage at a casino, eventually you’re going to own the house, but there are people in this country who are born blessed with much more than a 1% advantage. The top 1% already own almost 40% of the wealth, and since math hasn’t changed, those people, the Nouveau Aristocracy, are going to own even more in the future barring some kind of redistribution.I was propagandized from childhood to reject an aristocracy, inherited wealth & power, the establishment dynasties, but there is still a substantial portion of the population that longs after a royal line. They act as water-carriers & defenders of the Nouveau Aristocracy, and the entrenched winners protect their wealth through government capture, misdirection, inciting human disdain & secrecy. The narrative they promote is only they can actually be successful in business, and their defenders treat them like Rock Stars, defend their Nouveau Aristocracy, and claim that America's success trickles down from them. I think more like a quarter of the population would make great entrepreneurs, and perhaps 10-15% could be at the very top of success if they could get a little air. In my experience, the aspiring multimillionaires are much more committed and productive than those who have already pulled the gold ring. Just think what America’s economy would be like if 15% of the population were at the super-achiever level! Unfortunately, business is nearly a zero-sum game: the winners take it all while everyone else sucks wind. In America, Second Place is the first loser. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-15_18_nouveau_aristocracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-15_18_nouveau_aristocracy.mp3 3:03 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 18 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy One of the great American myths, perhaps the biggest of them all is, if you work hard, you can get rich. There's no sugar-coating that, it's as greed-based as it gets, and there's nothing wrong with letting natural human motives be the basis of a vibrant society, in fact, it's easier & more predictable that way, probably more efficient too. What's not right is that people want to attach a kind of reverse logic to the narrative: if you're rich, you must have worked hard. That's not only demonstrably not true in many cases but it also puts the emphasis on the wrong factor because financial success is one part capability, two parts effort & eight parts luck. There are lots-n-lots of people out there with skill & perseverance but only a tiny few get the brass ring because America is a lucktocracy more than anything else.Nobody is really too concerned about America being a lucktocracy, as long as the game ain't rigged. They want the same chance playing Lotto with their dollar as anyone else's dollar. Skill & perseverance adds to the number of tickets you can buy but people are okay with that too: no one really begrudges a couple in Philly who won a hundred million on a Daily Double, and athletes, entertainers, businessmen, prospectors, gamblers of all sorts are welcome to the American roulette wheel. We're still envious & resentful, and probably never want to see the lucky uncle ever again, but that's overcome with naive optimism, and a smug satisfaction that at least somebody won.The only problem is that people presume that someone else's lack of luck is condemnation of their work ethic, skill set, or lack of moral principles. Also luck includes being born smart, or athletic, or into a good family, or simply not getting caught when you do something stupid. No matter how good you are at something, there's a thousand other people just as good but they weren't lucky enough to get on the news, or have a catchy name, or be the flavor-of-the-week. Anyone could be replaced by someone else, it's only a matter of getting the situation right. People who are lucky need to recognize that, and people who are unlucky need to continue to hope for a change in their luck. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-13_17_lucktocracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-13_17_lucktocracy.mp3 3:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash lucktocracy, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 16 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Taxation is not a matter of liberty, or fairness, or principle, or class, or any philosophical babble: it is accounting. Every dime Government spends is a loan from the American people, and it needs to be paid back by the individuals who ended up with it. When Willie Sutton, a famous bandit, was asked why he robbed banks, he said, "because that's where the money is." The Poor can't pay any taxes, the Middle Class have deductions, and The Rich are coddled with magical Capital Gains welfare, so no one is paying back the money loaned to them by all the other citizens of America, which is why our National Debt is almost $20 trillion.The Reagan Tax Cuts were the biggest in history up to that time then Bush Jr passed the new largest tax cuts in history. The cuts are working great for The Rich, as demonstrated by the vast accumulation of wealth of the 0.01%. Lowered taxes also explains the astronomical increase in executive pay, sports prizes, and other highly-selective remuneration that would never have happened in bygone days when top tax rates were 90%. Executives used to forgo big salaries because they didn't want the government to get it all, and they didn't quit or work less as a result.The Rich get that way by taking a larger piece of the pie. Taxing low & middle income Americans is “regressive” taxation, because The Rich then take their larger piece. The most regressive tax of all is Social Security & Medicare, and Sales Tax is also terribly regressive. The Rich have the game rigged to accumulate wealth. “Progressive” taxation, increasing rates at higher incomes, is the best method of slowing this accumulation. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-11_16_taxes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-11_16_taxes.mp3 2:50 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash taxes, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 14 Nov 2023 08:45:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There's an almost total misunderstanding of federal-level economics among the general population. Conservatives keep comparing it to home budgets, and Progressives get it mixed up with Marxism.Money is imaginary, only made possible through Government. Would you really accept pieces of paper, or worse, computer numbers, if there wasn't an enforcement mechanism? Imaginary money is why you don't have to carry chickens around, and the machinations that a government can do to stimulate an economy is why those computers even exist. From this perspective, all money is government money.I know Conservatives use the term "Tax & Spend" to deride modern economic theory: they confuse economics with how they balance their own budgets: get money, spend it; and they try to apply this misconception to a national economy, a total incomprehension, but they did almost get the name right: the correct order is actually "Spend & Tax" economics; governments SPEND money then TAX it back at the end of the year. It seems obvious that the two numbers should match.The concept of Spend & Tax economics is actually quite easy to explain:First step: Every dime spent by Government is a loan to America and it doesn't make any difference what the money is spent on. Money doesn't know who's spending it nor what it's buying.Middle step: The only two inviolable rules are: production must exceed consumption, and the cycle cannot be broken; (for example, no Trade Deficit).Final step: Every dime eventually ends up in somebody's bank account, so it's easy to identify who has to pay back the loan. The people who have the money.Spend & Tax economics is a matter of simple accounting. Sometimes classically trained economists tout complex theories that sound enticingly plausible, and spout them with such conviction we all nod our heads in numbed agreement. But no matter how these fantastic constructions justify the wealthy accumulating all the money, or the lazy consuming it at other’s expense, I always remember the fundamental truism: you can fool me but you can't fool math. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-09_15_economics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-09_15_economics.mp3 3:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 12 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the 10 original ideas you have heard so far: Any question of politics can be boiled down to a simple yes or no answer. Wisdom is understanding human motivations. Naive optimism is the catalyst of human achievement. People seek control through claims of victimhood. Liberty is the primary determining factor of ideology. Democracy produces socialism if the American Dream is not maintained. There are no implicit society-wide values on individuals, only the law. No one knows better than you about what you want. Marxism reverses the responsibilities of your neighbor onto you. Science is the basis of knowledge, everything else is self-delusion and control-seeking. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-07_14_new_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-07_14_new_concepts.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 10 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Knowledge can come from facts or it can be fictional. It can derive from science which is based on facts, or mysticism which is based on nothing. Science is belief in things that can be proven while mysticism is the belief in things that can't. Viewed in the harsh light of healthy skepticism, the hold mysticism has on people seems irrational, but humans are nothing if not gullible, and they can be programmed relatively easily, as proven by the success of propaganda. Indoctrination, especially while young, is almost impossible to break, which is why something as nonsensical as religion is still so popular in America: trusted parents start telling their impressionable children that an invisible man lives in the sky, listens to their thoughts, grants their wishes, and comforts them when they die.Pop culture is also infiltrated with a litany of mystical beliefs in important fields like medicine & history. For example, quack remedies are everywhere and there was never an arc. There's also unhealthy thinking manifested as conspiracy theories, like 9/11 was committed by the Government, or the moon landing was a hoax. Deceit within the ranks of science is also common, and every supposed discovery must be tested and retested to ensure that the new knowledge is valid. View all new information with a large dose of skepticism, and only add it to your personal knowledge base when science proves it. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-05_13_science_v_mysticism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-05_13_science_v_mysticism.mp3 2:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 08 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Karl Marx is considered one of the most influential men of the last millennium, and obviously ideologies are separated by strong feelings, so the ideas of Marx are much maligned in the U.S., for good reason since they entirely conflict with liberty, but the interesting & often unknown fact is that Marx thought all nations must go through a stage of Capitalism to build the proper foundation before reaching his Utopian fantasy. Also interesting is that the fundamental premise of Marxism that so conflicts with liberty, “from those according to their ability, to those according to their need,” did not originate with Marx, though he popularized it and his name is synonymous with it, so we will use the term “Marxism to refer to this particularly odious belief.From those according to their ability, to those according to their need,”completely reverses the role of responsibility such that people are made responsible not for themselves, but for ot hers. A Marxist essentially believes that you suffer the consequences for other people's actions, and other people are benefited by the rewards of your own. This ideology exploits the base human motives of envy, spite, resentment & perversity. As proven in the modern day experiments in all the communist nations on the earth, it does not work because it goes against the natural human motives of avarice, vanity, pride & control upon which Market Forces economics depend. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-03_12_marxism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-03_12_marxism.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 06 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Capitalism often evokes images of OWGs rubbing their hands together, making millions without ever working a day in their life just because they had money to start with. While indeed that is the endpoint if wealth is not redistributed, a modern capitalist is actually more likely to be someone with skill, perseverance & luck that works very hard & long for the rewards they receive. That's not to say that 100 other people didn't work just as hard & long, Capitalism is still at its core a lucktocracy, but it's the lottery-like aspect of capitalism, the idea that you or your children may become rich through self-effort, that makes it so appealing to people whose ideology is liberty. As long as we all know someone who has “made it,” as long as we have one potentially successful kid or cousin, even if the numbers are small we're okay with capitalism, love it even, dream about it. Also the game can't seem to be rigged, and we all have to benefit through the axiom that “a raising tide lifts all ships” for Capitalism to maintain its place as the most efficient mechanism to create wealth. The fact that Capitalism is based on the human motivations of envy, avarice & vanity also means we're going with nature's flow.Due to the power of leverage, even with the creative disruption that Capitalism engenders, wealth accumulates, and in a purely Capitalistic society, it accumulates rather quickly. Vast accumulation of wealth inevitably becomes an aristocracy, the opposite of liberty. Other ideologies, such as socialism, recognize Capitalism for its efficiency and wealth creation capabilities, but do not like Capitalism in its pure form. And other collectivists, like Marxists, find Capitalism truly disturbing, even corrupt. One of the tactics of those who attack Capitalism is to exploit the human emotions of envy, resentment, pity & charity, but the fact remains that Capitalism is society's adrenaline. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-01_11_capitalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-02-01_11_capitalism.mp3 3:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 04 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Most nations use markets: I make shoes & trade them to you for corn because that's what I want, and you want shoes. Markets work well with liberty because it's you deciding what to exchange for, from who & rather it's worth making the exchange at all. Markets depend on an adversarial relationship, each side trying to maximize their leverage for the maximum personal gain, which turns out to be a net increase for both sides or the exchange would not occur.Market economies are very efficient: goods & services go to wherever there's the best return, and additional goods become available quickly to fill any unmet need. Similarly, if some product falls out of demand, production shifts to other goods whose demand is raising, or that can be poached from less-efficient producers, so that efficiency is also ever increasing. Unfortunately, markets are easily compromised by non-marketplace leverage from government, activists, collusion, monopoly & crime.Supply & demand seems simple enough & markets certainly benefit both producers & consumers and efficiency is forced to improve: what's there not to like? Well, markets are uncompromising & brutal, if those are words that concern you. Inefficient people are abandoned even quicker than inefficient products, and some people have a lot more choices than others.In a socialist society, this conflicts with the imperative of “most good to the most people,” so there is pressure to allocate goods and resources more “fairly.” Also, markets are subject to disruption where old products & industries are displaced new ones. To minimize this tendency, the socialist “efficiency” prerogative tends towards a command economy where people-who-know-better-than-me take my shoes and give me what they think I need in a fairer, more efficient manner, according to them anyway. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-30_10_market_forces_v_command_economy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-30_10_market_forces_v_command_economy.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 02 Nov 2023 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Kings used to rule, or the church. Laws could be arbitrary & often were with no input from the people they affected. Often the rules were said to come from God, or through God's oracle, and there is no arguing with God. America explicitly rejected the rules of kings in the Declaration of Independence, and our concept of “separation of church & state” rejects rules from God. Instead The People make their own laws through representatives in congress.Also, none of us can be strictly held to any standard other than the ones specifically worded in the law. There are no publicly enforced unwritten rules & implicit obligations, so-called morals and ethics. The words of old dead men have no power over us. We are only subject to the Rule Of Law. Minus a contract in law, no one is entitled to anything, nor can people be obligated to do anything without explicit acceptance on their part.The source of authority of all of our laws is the Constitution, which was an agreement written at a time in history when events were ripe for its emergence. The Constitution was influenced by history up until that time and it has been modified by subsequent events. If you were born here, the contract embodied by the Constitution and laws that emerge from it are implicit, meaning you, personally, didn’t agree to abide by them, but your parents did, and by remaining in America, you are subject to the rule of law too. On-the-other-hand, immigrants to this country explicitly agree to abide by the laws of the United States, in fact, they swear to it. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-28_9_rule-of-law_v_values.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-28_9_rule-of-law_v_values.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 31 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There are myriad ways a nation could make decisions: proclamation by an authority called autocracy, a lottery, an algorithm, scripture-based theocracy and, of course, democracy. Democracy isn't necessarily the best or most efficient way of making decisions but if everyone is an island of liberty then everyone wants to have an opinion, whether they know anything about the issue or not. Hopefully, statistically, there is always enough information & integrity that a majority can come to the “best” decisions.In the perfect democracy, everyone has complete knowledge, all vote, and the side with one vote more wins. But, of course, that's not even remotely possible, so at the beginning of our nation's history we substituted something that has the aspect of democracy but establishes a special class, the representative method. Not ideal but workable if the representatives are truly representative of the people they are supposedly representing. Unfortunately, these elite people can be captured by Special Interests. Combine that with pandering, apathy & voter suppression, and democracy delivers the same results as an autocracy.Democracy also is a two-edged sword in its relationship to liberty: everybody gets to make their own decisions but they also pledge to abide by the decisions of the majority, which may actually decide to reduce the liberty of the individual. The Constitution limits how much liberty can be taken away but the Constitution paints Rights in broad strokes with lots of room for interpretation, and as the Supreme Court has demonstrated in decisions like Obamacare, the leeway can be substantial indeed. Knowing that people act in their own self-interest, the choice between envy & hope is the main support for liberty, so The American Dream, which offers a chance of a better life vs. a mediocre one, is all that keeps a democratic nation from slipping into socialism. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-26_8_democracy_v_autocracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-26_8_democracy_v_autocracy.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 29 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberty is self-determination, and reaping the rewards & consequences of one's own actions. The United States is the only Liberty nation: its laws default to liberty, its youth is indoctrinated to liberty, liberty is a major part of the American narrative. If you were born here, our way of life seems natural and you are prepared how to think and what your reactions will be when other people exercise their own liberty. You are taught to control your envy & resentment towards those that have more than you.However, the rest of the World equates liberty with selfishness. No other nation espouses that you are responsible for yourself and no one else is responsible for you. No other nation claims that whether a person benefits or suffers is a combination of effort & luck and you keep what you kill. No other nation defaults to the wants of the individual override the needs of the many.Socialism is the opposite of liberty. Socialists believe the needs of the many outweigh the wants of the few. Since individuals cannot be trusted to decide what that is, socialists have an elite ruling body which claims to know-what-is-better-for-everyone and forces you to do as they say. They claim fairness & efficiency is enough reason to subsume your liberty. Unfortunately, complete knowledge & presience is required to make such determinations, and since complex systems like life are essentially chaos, and no one can tell the future, socialism fails to be either fair or efficient. It simply placates the base emotions of envy & resentment of its suboptimal members at the expense of its exceptional members. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-24_7_liberty_v_socialism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-24_7_liberty_v_socialism.mp3 2:41 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 27 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy To counter the litany of negative base human emotions, there is an overpowering positive one: naive optimism. Naive optimism is the most precious of human foibles because it irrationally overlooks the impossibilities of life & sees only the possibilities. It's the counterbalance to hopelessness, discouragement & depression, and the reason people continue to strive against tremendous odds. The other uplifting emotions, serenity, humor & love, come at its behest. People without naive optimism are dangerous because they have nothing to lose: to them a suicide vest seems like a good idea. Also mental illness & depression that sublimate a person's naive optimism is the most cruel disability of all.In real life, sophisticated people often exploit the optimism of the naive, in business, in sex & in politics. A wise person would play this game delicately because no one is a worse enemy than one who thinks they were lied to, and whose pride & self-respect is degraded & abused. However, for a vibrant society, naive optimism is the elixir that makes it all happen. Naive optimism only works if the possibility of success actually exists, however small. Being rewarded, even if only in the abstract, will keep naive optimism alive. I, myself, the Wyest Myn in the Wyrld, is motivated by naive optimism. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-22_6_naive_optimism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-22_6_naive_optimism.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 25 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Control is the most insidious human motivation. The fundamental goal of all people, either consciously or unconsciously, is to be in control. The simple fact is that you are the center of your universe, as are we all, and we all wish to control our universes. Any personal action fundamentally boils down to whether we gain more control, or escape the control of others. This is why, deep down, people despise any kind of authority because by definition, being managed by others is lack of control.There are three things that immediately affect our control: first, there’s social hierarchy, like government: it's something we accept but we don't like it. Then there's change: anything new has the inherent defect that it is unfamiliar, hence, unknown and threatening to our control. This is the basis of conservatism and popularity of tradition. Finally, knowledge is power, and if someone else is more knowledgeable than you, they threaten your control. No one can know everything, so we can choose to accept our lack of knowledge or we can ignore things we don't know: this is the motivation behind science denial & mysticism. Political ideologies are all about control: for example, socialists demand the individual must bear the yoke of society, while libertarians claim that society must submit to individuals first.Always there are some people eager to gain control over others. They are always testing for ways to exercise control. In fact, society has implicit rules, like courtesy, that can be leveraged to give people control. Beggars exploit courtesy, as do all the self-centered vegans, gluten-freers, allergies, and every other kind of courtesy free-rider. What those people are really doing is imposing their desires on you, they are exerting control. Similarly, claiming victimhood, historical adversity or disability is an attempt at control. Another manifestation of seeking control is to consciously be illogical & act irrationally: these people are intentionally exploiting the base reactions of those around them: pity, charity, fear & cowardliness. However, the most common method of imposing control is claiming mystical beliefs. This justification is enshrined in America's "religious freedom" mythology, which seems persuasive to inattentive, unsophisticated & in individuals lacking wisdom. If you are not vigilant, you can easily fall under the control of one of these tactics.We may verbalize some other, more socially acceptable reason for seeking control, like duty or honor or, my favorite, efficiency, but the real goal is apparent for anyone looking to see it. Personally, I have no problem with everyone owning their own universe, as long as it doesn’t affect me, which is why liberty is so appealing. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-20_5_control.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-20_5_control.mp3 4:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 23 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Wisdom is about people & people are the result of their motives, hence wisdom is about human motives. Everything you think you know about human feelings & motives is wrong. If you're like me, you initially learned most of what you know about the motives of people from fairy-tales & television written for entertainment, not representations of real life. In real life, people are base & self-serving, not the logical, rational & socially sophisticated icons they are portrayed in stories. Pragmatically speaking, people lie, cheat, steal & act in their own best interest, but that isn't what we are told at home, or in Sunday School, or from politicians. Nor is it socially acceptable to intimate that people's motives aren't anything but pure & honest. One thing Catholicism got right is that behind the eyes of the person you're negotiating with is envy, avarice, lust, vanity, greed & resentment. Even love is selfish and jealous. And every reaction is tinged with spite, perversity, vindictiveness & passive-aggressiveness. I'm using my wysdom credentials when making these claims. You can believe your church or your congressman or your guru, or you can keep listening to these podcasts if you want the truth. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-18_4_human_motives.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-18_4_human_motives.mp3 2:10 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 21 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Every complex decision begins by answering the most fundamental question, one on which all subsequent answers depend. The fundamental question has a special word assigned to it, liberty: do individuals make their own decisions or are they told what to do? Your ideology derives from how you answer this question because almost all other parts of governance, society, commerce, economy & knowledge depend on it.Governance divides between democracy, where everyone gets to decide who leads us, or leaders are selected for us.In a society, are there implicit obligations on people, called morals & values, or do people choose what they will be responsible for, called rule-of-law.Commerce utilizes market-forces, individual actors making decisions for themselves, but a few times in our history there have been price controls and rationing, a top-down, command approach.The choice of economy, Capitalist vs. Marxian, decides whether the focus is on owners or workers?And is knowledge can be based on science which can be tested by anyone, or mysticism where proclamations are made & not questioned. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-17_3_ideology_mixed.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-17_3_ideology_mixed.mp3 1:51 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 19 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The U.S. congress has an approval rating in the single digits because our representatives are often in gridlock, which leads to frustration, inaction, and inevitable public disenchantment. How is it that people who are seemingly, in a world view, so much alike but have so much difficulty coming to a conclusion? The primary blame lies on those people’s inability to objectively make decisions. In science and engineering, a programming analysis always results in an objective answer, but in subjective real-life, like politics, answers don’t have to be rational to still be logical given the true, unvoiced human motives. And sometimes, due to diametrically opposed self-interests, there is no reason to discuss the issue further until something changes: different demographics, different demagogues, different demands, before wasting anymore time & energy. Another big problem is that politicians intentionally obfuscate their goals because they know if their true intentions or allegiances were known, their treachery would be exposed. Playing 20-questions will more quickly identify their mendacity, and pinpoint where they are trying to mislead you. It won’t cure their dishonesty but it will allow us to walk away faster. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-17_2_decision_making_mixed.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-17_2_decision_making_mixed.mp3 1:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 17 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy by Dr. Martin D. Hash, Esq. When I was growing up, I felt like I was only one who didn't know what was going on, everything was confusing, life seemed too complex to understand. I wanted to know. Now, after an expansive education, after multiple careers, after a lifetime of searching for wisdom, I've finally figured it out, and I've codified it, and I'm going to give the Secret-of-the-Universe to you. I'll start with the observation that it is probable that computers will one day mimic humans, and since computers only use binary logic, that proves that any decision can be derived from a series of yes-no questions, regardless how complicated or seemingly intractable the problem is. Intuitively, anybody who played 20-Questions as a kid knows that you always start with the question that eliminates the most possibilities, and each subsequent question should narrow the options more and more until there is only one possible outcome. In fact, it’s not the answers that are difficult, it’s the questions. Therefore the Secret-of-the-Universe is to determine what questions to ask, and in what order to ask them. There are no gray areas, and the answers will have the unequivocal certainty of deductive logic. These podcasts will be short, a few minutes at most, one idea at a time, each building on top of the other. Politics & Philosophy by Dr. Martin D. Hash, Esq. https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-17_1_introduction_mixed.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-01-17_1_introduction_mixed.mp3 2:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, philosophy, Martin Hash, humor no Sun, 15 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Advice is easy to come by but wisdom is a difficult concept: 1. There can be no rational debate if one side loses and the other side wins. 2. Blocking trolls will make your online experience much more pleasurable. 3. Live in your Calm Sphere and let everyone else live in theirs. 4. Accept your loses but remain optimistic to the end. 5. You’ll never be happy if you don’t have personal goals to satisfy. 6. Collecting is one of life’s little enjoyments that too many people don’t take advantage of. 7. Going retro can create a personality for yourself. 8. Faith in leadership has never been so low, and deservedly so. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-15_1400_advice__wisdom_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-15_1400_advice__wisdom_concepts.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, advice, wisdom no Fri, 13 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Faith in leadership is at an all-time historical low, primarily because most people are more comfortable with decisions they make for themselves over others that want to make decisions for them. This is especially true in a Liberty society but even in totalitarian nations, the general populace is at least sophisticated enough to know there’s no elite class that has their best interests at heart and are intelligent & prescient enough to do what’s best for everybody, whatever the propaganda says. In the past, and even now, many people have faith there is a supernatural source so that their leadership will perform admirably most of the time. Their confidence is misguided and often dangerous; oversight, accountability, and “trust but verify” attitudes are mandatory. There’s even the question of whether leadership is required at all. A bureaucratic state, with thousands of individual decision-makers, can function without a leader if the goals are clearly stipulated. To a Libertarian, this even seems like the ideal form of government, but that’s also its weakness: it’s an ideal, not reality. In the real world, people contrive, manipulate & exploit for their own best interests and the power of their group. Their goal is control of everyone, and they’ll use the bureaucratic mechanism to do that. At least with a leader, elected or not, there’s a chance that they are wise & altruistic enough to punish such overreach. Unfortunately, we haven’t had any leaders like that for a long time. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-15_1399_faith_in_leadership.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-15_1399_faith_in_leadership.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, leadership no Wed, 11 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Retro is usually considered to be the style you went through puberty with: the clothes, furniture, entertainment. Going retro is a good way of reliving that time, presumably you have mostly good memories from when you were a kid, just before becoming an adult with the maturity & responsibility that comes with it. If you take pride in your retromania, other people will respect & admire you for it. Not all, of course, the ones that get their value from the cost of their purse or car certainly won’t take any notice of you, but they weren’t going to anyway. Dressing retro, wearing retro jewelry & listening to music from your era is only a little step. There is also the option of decorating your dwelling appropriate to that time period. People who visit will either recognize & appreciate your style or think you’re a hipster; at worst is maybe they’ll think you’re a little eccentric, which is a good way of projecting your unique personality. The next level of retro is to have a record turntable, maybe even a VHS recorder or DVD player, and it’s become very fashionable to own old videogame consoles from your era; an Atari 2600 with games will gets lots of ohs & ahs. Another good thing about retro is that you can do it on the cheap or spend as much money as you want and nobody can tell. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-15_1398_retro.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-15_1398_retro.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, retro no Mon, 09 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Collecting things, whatever they may be: physical as in coins, temporal goals, or ephemeral experiences, allows people to control their lives. This leads to a sense of satisfaction which is a major component of happiness. Collecting need not be intentional, and often isn’t, but if you want to consciously use collecting as a mechanism of control, collect something that you enjoy collecting; don't make it a job. You should be entertained by your collecting when you’re engaged in it, and proud of the accumulation the rest of the time. Life is for your entertainment; if you’re entertained by collecting and take pride in it, that's a lot better than spending money & time on drinks and trendy food. Collecting things provides focus & fixation, escaping outside stress by dominating your thoughts with esoterica. It’s also a kind of sport, and just like practice, playing & winning, the resulting dopamine relieves anxiety. Collecting doesn’t have to be anything more than that but it can even be a form of investing; most "investing" is just inflation, and collectibles can do that. Unfortunately, adding this element, though adding to the satisfaction, may subtract from the relaxation. Some people become obsessive compulsive about their collecting, and that’s a warning sign of depression or perhaps a tinge of autism. Don’t worry unless it starts to affect their lives negatively. Collecting even leads to respect & admiration from others who see your collections. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-15_1397_collecting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-15_1397_collecting.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, collecting no Sat, 07 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor People are mostly happy; that’s how evolution made us, optimistic; those who weren’t didn’t survive, or they had no self-awareness, like animals, but when asked, people admit that things could be better. They’re not sure what the things are that would make them happy but money is certainly #1 on their list because the perception is that money can cure all ills. Contrary to what most Advice columnists say, that’s true, money is the cure to almost everything because money provides opportunity, and opportunity is one of the 2 components of liberty, and liberty makes people happy, or at least satisfied. Liberty-centric people are also wise enough to know that happiness is transitory: here now, gone later, hopefully to return, though not in the same way. What makes this analysis provocative is that money is imaginary and only has value as a mechanism of achieving your personal goals. What are your personal goals? Certainly not just the accumulation of money for bragging rights only. What about achievements like getting an education or excelling in your career? Or accomplishments like maintaining your health & traveling the world? Personal goals don’t count if they’re assigned to you by society: morals & values are not goals, egalitarianism is not personal, and recognition by your peers puts control over your life into somebody else’s hands. Certainly, Personal goals are facilitated by money, merit & luck. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-14_1396_personal_goals.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-14_1396_personal_goals.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, goals, happiness no Thu, 05 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor I've already accepted that American-style liberty has lost and the next step is to be like Europe. I've already accepted that if there is a backlash, it will be from the Fascists, not the defenders of liberty. I've already accepted that there's no place to run because the infection will spread from those trying to escape. I’ve already accepted that my children, and certainly my grandchildren, are highly influenced by the ideals, goals & manipulation of feminists, minorities & weirdos. I’ve already accepted that there’s no coming back in a democracy because the other side has all the institutions of indoctrination. Even though I’ve already accepted these things, there are things that I haven’t accepted. I won't accept we should do what is best-for-everyone rather than take care of ourselves. I still believe that MAGA was the best time to be alive. I still believe in the heroes of my youth: scientists & engineers that went to the moon, sincere politicians that inspired the country to do so, and religions that held the envy, resentment & insecurity at bay. I still believe in myself, and how well my own children turned out under the old regime; and I still believe I have the wisdom to know that optimism & hope must triumph for a happy & fulfilling life. So even though I’ve accepted the worst, I still wish for the best. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-14_1395_ive_already_accepted.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-14_1395_ive_already_accepted.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, accepted, MAGA no Tue, 03 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor I sometimes imagine that I’m surrounded by a transparent sphere, almost a forcefield, that protects me from the craziness, because just on the other side the world seems to be in chaos, from my perspective at least. I call it my “calm sphere,” and recommend it to my friends & family. We all have an idealized version of our life that everything would be perfect if just a few things were fixed, so except for those things, our life is calm. However, from the outside, from other people’s points-of-view, those few things, when added to the few things of everybody else, makes everything look nuts: marriages, children, jobs, politics, debt, mental illness, etc., surround us, only held out by your imaginary calm sphere. The important thing about your calm sphere is that you have to believe in it; not like make believe, but you have to know to take care of your own few problems, and don’t let anymore in. Here’s an example: you walk into a grocery store but there’s some gal in a mask wiping down her cart in the doorway, wait, wait, finally she moves enough you can sneak through, your calm sphere protects you from frustration. Inside the store, there are carts going slowly and on the wrong side that you have to maneuver around, and long lines you have to negotiate, so busy yourself inside your calm sphere looking at the magazines or reading your phone, then pay & get out as fast as you can without knocking people over. Shopping is just a metaphor for how to protect all aspects of your life by ensconcing yourself in a calm sphere. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-14_1394_calm_sphere.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-14_1394_calm_sphere.mp3 2:48 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, calm sphere, frustration no Sun, 01 Oct 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Blocking Whenever someone speaks up to support traditional American values, they are shouted down in every conversational sphere, mainstream media & social media. The speakers are gaslighted, brigaded, and suffer an endless stream of vituperative & insults. Any serious discussion is ruined, no chance to maintain any coherent train of thought. It is especially egregious online, where the tactic of heckler’s veto is overwhelming successful as censorship. Rights are not incontrovertible so if one side doesn’t act in good faith then neither should the other; both sides need to be playing by the same rules. Rather than being a victim to people who don’t respect free speech, censor them back via Blocking. Block people online who are rude & unreasonable, reciting talking points, name-calling, endlessly repeating the same thing; people who are impervious to logic and even facts. It’s probable that those voices are focused attacks by trolls, maybe even bots? You’ll find that you don't have to Block very many before a sincere conversation can emerge as they are eliminated. Try it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-14_1393_blocking.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-14_1393_blocking.mp3 2:05 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, free speech, blocking no Fri, 29 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Older people still expect arguments, especially political ones, to be between people who generally want the same thing but differ on how to achieve it, but that only works in a homogeneous society, one with optimism where envy, resentment & perversity are discouraged. All people wanted to be happy, to make something of themselves, to build a life and leave something to their families. Mental illness, insecurity & fear weren’t encouraged. Only psychopaths wanted to burn it all down. Back-in-the-day, we mixed a little socialism with a lot of Capitalism, a little authoritarianism with a lot of freedom, a little feminism with a lot of traditional family values, but in our now diverse society, there are entire groups of people who want things that are opposite of what we want. There is no mixture of Marxism and liberty, period; there is no mixture of racism and ignoring race; there is no mixture of freedom and slavery. In fact, the other side wants you dead, if for nothing else, to save the environment. They disrespect, hates & find you so contemptible that they will lie, cheat, gaslight, and celebrate when you die. There is certainly no rational debate. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-14_1392_no_rational_debate.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-14_1392_no_rational_debate.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate no Wed, 27 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Everyone likes to talk about money & wealth: 1. Life Insurance is the ultimate altruism because you don’t get any benefit. 2. As the dollar devalues, real things increase in value. 3. A new reserve currency would really put pressure on the old reserve currency. 4. Money has less real value than glitter. 5. Hyperinflation is inflation’s inflation. 6. Capitalism needs people who are rich on paper. 7. It’s what’s after UBI that should make you afraid. 8. Hoarding wealth is hoarding liberty. 9. Who it is that redistributes wealth makes all the difference. 10. The Income Gap was caused by a focus on investment rather than productivity. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1391_money__wealth_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1391_money__wealth_concepts.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, money, wealth no Mon, 25 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor When I got married, we were both going to college while working part-time. We had a cheap car, cheap apartment, and still went to Europe for a month. Then we bought a house at 21% interest, a car, and had 3 kids who needed baby-sitting, all on the income of entry-level jobs with no help from anywhere, and both of us still going to school part time for another degree. Can't do that now. Over the decades interest rates went down to 3%, though most people didn’t notice. However, what that did was jack up the stock market, jack up housing prices, jack up car prices, jack up the price of everything that people borrow money for because they could afford to finance higher prices. At the same time, Government has been adding dramatic amounts of imaginary money into the economy, and because of the fundamentals of Capitalism, all that money has concentrated, and it's been happening for decades, such that now the gap between what used to be a normal income is so large as to create a de facto aristocracy, with a small portion of the salary pool riding high while everyone else still lives like teenagers. The solution is, unfortunately, wage inflation, which will contribute to overall inflation, but eventually regular people can buy houses & cars again, hopefully closing the income gap. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1390_income_gap.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1390_income_gap.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, income gap no Sat, 23 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It’s the distribution of wealth that makes redistributing it an imperative. If 1% of the population own a third of the real wealth, especially if they can pass it down through the generations, that’s simply an aristocracy without titles. The people who have the wealth, of course, like it like that but as history shows, if wealth distribution doesn’t somehow align with people’s expectations in benign ways, eventually it will be redistributed in violent ways. Wealth redistribution is a divisive topic because the majority of people will benefit at the minority of people’s expense. In a pure democracy, that would have already happened. Luckily for the wealthy, there are Constitutional guarantees but these are interpreted by the courts, who are aware of the people’s predilections, so the motive for redistribution is very important. The distinction between wealth redistribution as maintenance verses redistributing out of envy is a subtle one; you can tell the real motive by who’s redistributed from, and who’s redistributed to: from the Middle Class to the Rich: that’s the Conservatives; and from the Middle Class to the Poor: that’s the Progressives; and from the Rich to the Middle Class: those are Liberals; and from nobody to nobody is a Libertarian fantasy. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1389_wealth_distribution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1389_wealth_distribution.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wealth, redistribution no Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The idea of Scrooge McDuck sitting atop a pyramid of gold is part of the American zeitgeist; nobody really asks why, it’s just assumed that’s the pinnacle of happiness. It takes too much self-awareness & introspection to determine that wealth does not equate to happiness, or even knowing if you’re happy. If there was a spiritual guide who could help you determine such things, they would say that you only need enough wealth to make you happy; after that it’s simply a hobby. The most conflicted people are the ones who say wealth would let them obtain fancy cars, homes & sex, but then choose to instead keep their wealth rather than to pursue such things. Then there are those who have dozens of cars, homes & concubines, more than they could ever use. Both groups are hoarding wealth that results in nothing. Then there’s the half of Americans who consume more than they produce, and another quarter are incompetent for one reason or another, but that still leaves 24% of Americans who are in the grind while 1% have a third of all wealth. Granted, a lot of that wealth is tied up in businesses but it’s possible that a single person could get gigantic banks loans to buy all the gold in the world, form it into a pyramid, and sit on top. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1388_hoarding_wealth.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1388_hoarding_wealth.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, hoard wealth no Tue, 19 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor I used to think the anti-tax but pro-UBI position was ironic, similar to "keep government’s hands off my social security," but my sense of humor is being crushed by self-interest, illogic & irrationality. A coming Universal Basic Income, UBI, is almost a certainty, assuming the economy lasts long enough to implement it. It already exists for a large part of society: 19% on welfare, 13% disabled, 12% on social security, and 22% are children. That leaves only a third of Americans who still work for a living. It would be awesome if people didn't have to work so that they could do something meaningful: join an ashram, chant their mantra, make the world to be a better place full of goodness & light. I personally don't know anybody who would work if they didn't have to, I wouldn't have at 18; I would have been down at the beach writing in a dairy about my great life while drinking margaritas someone else paid for. It was later on in life, with experience I was forced to endure, when I finally produced more than I consumed, and I liked it. I’m sure it’s similar for everyone else, if given a chance, no one would learn to work, nor learn to enjoy their work, meaning they wouldn’t have contributed to the design of the robots who presumably are going to be doing all the working in the future. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1387_fear_ubi.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1387_fear_ubi.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, UBI, universal basic income no Sun, 17 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Business is good for society; in fact, the most important aspect of a Liberty society is business, especially creating & running your own. Because liberty facilitates inequality, a large portion of the population who is intimidated by the success of others, even the perception that someone else is achieving something, often want to penalize the people who make them feel inadequate, most often directed at billionaires. There’s also the mistaken belief that billionaires have huge amounts of money at their personal disposal with which to pay taxes. To say a multi-billionaire’s net worth has increased by billions obscures the fact that they don’t personally get that money, it’s just imaginary. It makes sense that the imaginary-billionaire, who doesn’t actually take possession of the profit their company generates, should instead be able to reinvest it back into the company without taxation, even though it does increase their imaginary net worth, because they’re only getting richer on paper. However, if at some point the billionaire draws cash out of their company for their own gratification then tax it, and certainly redistribute the billionaire’s assets at their death so that the wealth doesn’t remain concentrated, even if it is only on paper. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1386_rich_on_paper.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-13_1386_rich_on_paper.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, rich, wealth, tax no Fri, 15 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The difference between inflation and hyperinflation is important because the former can go on indefinitely, though inconveniently, while the latter indicates the end of an economy. Hyperinflation is accelerating inflation. There’s also the smokescreen that the government uses to cover for inflation: for the past couple of decades, they show that the inflation rate has hovered around 2%, which it has for the things most people think of as everyday purchases. However, stocks have inflated tremendously because borrowing money was so cheap, but most people aren’t affected by the stock market. Big ticket items like houses & cars, have also been inflating at the same rate; now they're so expensive that people with normal incomes can't afford them. Wage inflation is required to catch up, combined with high interest rates. There are differing narratives of what causes inflation but the simplest is when there’s so much imaginary money, almost $400 trillion, but only $100 trillion of real things to buy. It’s not just a 4:1 ratio because most people who have something real aren’t going to exchange it for something imaginary, so all that money chases the few things that are for sale, resulting in hyperinflation. It still has to be triggered to start people, companies & countries into panic-buying, and in that respect, the world’s economy, America’s specifically, has been remarkably resilient against hyperinflation, so-much-so that even Lockdowns didn’t trigger it. Perhaps the war in Ukraine will be the catalyst, or the next thing that comes along, but when hyperinflation is the only solution, it eventually will be the solution. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-12_1385_hyperinflation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-12_1385_hyperinflation.mp3 2:53 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, inflation, hyperinflation no Wed, 13 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Money is imaginary but nobody notices; it’s an illusion, like a magic trick, based on the audience’s preconceptions of what’s going to happen. However, if you know how the trick works, it’s easy to see it happening. To get past your conditioning, every time you think about money, picture glitter in your mind: beautiful in its reflectivity, seemingly complex, it arouses your avarice. We live in the delusion that people with lots of glitter never have to work, that saving glitter is worthwhile, and that watching glitter accumulate is somehow productive. Now imagine you’re picking up a handful of the glitter, feeling its lightness, and throw it into the air to scatter in the wind, and recall that it’s money. It’s amazing that glitter has become so all-powerful! In the distant past, raiders on horseback didn’t care how much glitter a city had, only what they could carry off. A rich trader was no better slave than a peasant girl, less so even. A king could not offer glitter to the Genghis Khan and expect to live; no, it would have to be grain & horses. As time went by and there was no longer the threat of violence, glitter was able to substitute for reality, so much so that there is 100 times more glitter than things to buy, and people deal only in glitter, get wealthy from glitter, become aristocrats by inheriting glitter. Glitter is replacing reality but you can’t eat glitter. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-12_1384_glitter.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-12_1384_glitter.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, money no Mon, 11 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor America’s military might is formidable but that’s not what gives the United States control of the world, for that they use finances. Since money is imaginary, if two countries trade with each other, how do they transfer from one imaginary currency to the other? Behind most international money and security transfers is the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications, called SWIFT in the vernacular. SWIFT is the messaging network of all financial institutions. Without SWIFT, businesses can’t do business, and SWIFT is denominated in U.S. dollars. If that wasn’t enough, all Oil payments in the world are denominated in U.S. dollars. This makes the U.S. dollar the de facto world currency, the so-called reserve currency. The power of controlling the only reserve currency is immense; so big in fact, that it was the primary weapon used against Russia in its invasion of Ukraine. Russia could no longer do business with the world because they were blocked out of SWIFT. It almost worked but Russia, along with other major countries that did not want to be under the thumb of fickle American political machinations, is trying to create their own reserve currency. Russia, China & India trade among themselves without SWIFT now, and Saudi Arabia has begun selling oil in other currencies. This will create a competing international banking system, which is good, because there needs to be an alternative when, for example, Canada froze the bank accounts of the truckers protesting against vaxx mandates. Government won’t be able to shut down competing voices by isolating them from money if there is a new reserve currency to go to. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-12_1383_new_reserve_currency.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-12_1383_new_reserve_currency.mp3 3:05 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, SWIFT, reserve currency no Sat, 09 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor America alone has printed more money in the last few years than the world has ever seen, and that’s only part of the money-printing worldwide. Milton Friedman economists used to insist that printing money was the source of inflation, and hence devaluation of the dollar, but several decades of huge deficits and zero inflation proved them wrong, the value of the U.S. dollar stayed strong. On the other side are the Modern Monetary Theorists who insist the U.S. can print itself out of any financial problem, and for the most part they’re correct because money is imaginary and most financial problems are too; it’s not like a bank going broke stops chickens laying eggs. However, there is a direct connection between money and reality: inflation is caused scarcity. If there’s need for a dozen eggs but there are only 11, the cost of the 12th egg will be whatever the richest person will spend on it. Before endless money, prices could only go up so much, but with vast amounts of concentrated imaginary money and insane wealth inequality, the price of things is immaterial and can raise stratospherically, devaluing the dollar to almost nothing, taking a wheelbarrow full just to buy a loaf of bread, just like when this happened all the other times before. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-12_1382_dollar_devaluation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-12_1382_dollar_devaluation.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, devaluation, scarcity no Thu, 07 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Life insurance, unlike most insurance, is guaranteed to payout. Whether Life insurance pays more than you paid into it is another question, and in the case of Term Life, if you don’t die during the term, it’s just as worthless as any other insurance. Whole Life is the one that doesn’t go away and you can borrow from it. In modern times, where men are no longer the only breadwinner, and half the women will be single & childless by 2030, which implies half the men won’t be in relationships either, Life insurance doesn’t make sense. A person’s goal shouldn’t be to enrich others after their death as some kind of virtue signal. Life insurance does have the interesting side effect of indicating death quantity anomalies; for example, after COVID vaccines began being administered en masse, there was an unpredicted increase in the deaths of young, healthy people. Why? Suicides? Overdoses? Lockdown lethargy? There are lots of possibilities suggested by those who will admit it’s even happening but any speculation it might be directly related to The Jab will get a researcher Cancelled. The most insidious & evil excuse would be for the Life insurance companies to take advantage of the hysteria by raising rates, a situation that only life insurance agent’s look forward to. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-12_1381_life_insurance.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-12_1381_life_insurance.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, life insurance no Tue, 05 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review the concepts of taxes & jobs: 1. Death taxes are the only bulwark against a rising aristocracy. 2. Consumption taxes are the worst kind of taxes. 3. How will we know when an economic crash finally comes? 4. Credit Default Swaps intentionally move risk onto gamblers who don’t care who they hurt if they go broke. 5. The Robot Age always seems to be a decade away. 6. A shortened work week only sounds good if you have something else to do. 7. Internships are more nepotism than experience. 8. Being lucky is more important than being productive but being both is phenomenal. 9. Farmland determines whether a nation can support itself. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1380_taxes__jobs_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1380_taxes__jobs_concepts.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, taxes, jobs no Sun, 03 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There’s a romance about farmland that affects all parts of culture; from the organic growers to the industrial combines. There’s a wholesomeness that surrounds farmland, even when it’s commercialized, because we’re reminded of farms every time we go into a grocery store; and the beauty of fruits & vegetables also has a lot to do with it. Disconcertingly, many children have never even visited a farm, and the only farm animals they’ve ever seen were in a petting zoo. They haven’t ever seen fields of corn or wheat except on television. This disconnect between where we live and what we eat has led to the last few generations wanting to put farmland into nature conservancies to protect the environment. Farming is existential: without it, most people die; certainly civilizations fall, as they have throughout history when the rains didn’t fall, or the harvest failed. In fact, in the United States and elsewhere, farmland is considered of strategic importance which shouldn’t be subject to normal Capitalist upheaval. That’s why government maintains the resource with heavy subsidies even during times of plenty: “garmers get paid not to grow food,” comes from this phenomenon. Unfortunately, farmland requires farmers, and those are raised, not made. With less-and-less people not growing up on farms and instead becoming environmentalists, this may become a problem? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1379_farmland.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1379_farmland.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, farmland no Fri, 01 Sep 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The most productive, hard-working, intelligent guy in the world can’t produce 20 times more than another productive, hard-working, intelligent guy. Anything more than that is simply a jackpot. Jeff Bezos isn’t smarter, wiser, or more experienced than me, and he didn’t work harder or longer. In fact, I wrote a White paper in 1993 while at Microsoft, titled “Buying Blue Jeans on the Internet.” It was ignored to Microsoft’s discredit because they could have been Amazon. It was chance that Bezos got a Vulture Capitalist who recognized his concept and had endlessly deep pockets to finance the company for 20 years while losing money to discourage competition; in fact, Amazon’s the worst kind of predatory Capitalism. Bezos gets credit for the part of his success that wasn’t luck but that doesn’t make him better than a million other people who could have done the same thing given the circumstances. Some percentage of capable & productive people also get fabulously lucky, and their liberty means the rewards are theirs during their lifetime, but our understanding, respect & forbearance ends with them, not their heirs. Don’t enshrine luck into an aristocracy with unfettered inheritance. If a lucky-productive person acts nepotistic during their lifetime, that’s bad enough, taking opportunity from more meritorious candidates, but extending luck & nepotism into infinite generations is society-destroying. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1378_productivity_vs_luck.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1378_productivity_vs_luck.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Bezos, inheritance no Wed, 30 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Internships are lauded at prestigious businesses, though less common in mundane, non-elitist enterprises. It’s implied & assumed that interns are selected via merit but nepotism plays a much bigger role, and for those that aren’t connected, many of the best internships are actually paid for by the parents or someone. A lot of jobs are like that too, especially writing jobs at magazines, or some form of media or entertainment. Internships on movie sets are highly sought after and you can bet there’s money being passed under the table, that or something less savory. Such shenanigans continue after the internship is over. There is such a tremendous amount of money concentrated in the Top 1% that what their children do is totally fabricated. There are more children of wealthy people than there are prestigious jobs. In many cases a job is created especially for them, but for the richest & most nepotistic, whole companies are created and kept afloat just for the benefit of offspring, who then project control & influence far beyond anything they could do themselves. In many esoteric businesses, things only make financial sense when you find out who the people involved were related to. Internships are simply the first step to an artificial career. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1377_internship.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1377_internship.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, internship no Mon, 28 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Given that productivity, especially due to mechanization, will continue to increase, how many employees would forego part of their salary if they were able to work shorter hours? The top 20% income earners can choose to work part-time but most people have to do their 40 hours to make the mortgage & utilities, and raising a family is 2 full-time jobs. Productivity would have to be much greater than it is today for those folks to have the basics and still only work part-time but it seems inevitable that it will be. The question still remains: how many would? Some countries have mandated shortened work weeks: workers in the Netherlands work 29.5 hours per week, and several other countries are in the low 30s. How would it work? Would employers offer a salary for a job that is split among multiple employees who choose to work only part time? Many people, it seems, would want the full salary and work the entire time. Would the strategy be that they would have to be paid overtime on anything over the shortened work week, like now? That’s definitely a worker-centric attitude rather than one promoting free agency & efficiency because it means that a person who wanted to work extra hours would have to get another job, perhaps several, like they do now. Some employers want the reduced benefits costs that come from fewer employees, so that would need to be addressed; healthcare being the biggest expense. Would there be shortages? Other things may still cause shortages, such as transportation disruptions or political policies, but Americans not being able to produce enough for other Americans, even the whole world, working less hours is not one of them. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1376_shorter_work_week.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1376_shorter_work_week.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, shorter work week no Sat, 26 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There’s no problem with productivity in American, especially considering the upcoming Robot Age: robots driving cars, robots cleaning houses, robots growing & preparing food, robots doing all the clerking tasks, even robots tending children; it will be just like the science fiction stories. Robots imply less work for the same Quality-of-Life, so presumably a huge chunk of the population could live a physically satisfactory life with less expenditure of effort. This is presumably a good thing… Or is it? The question becomes: what will people do? Most people aren’t creative and even if they were trained to be passable draftsmen, art quickly becomes mundane, and anyway, robots could do it better. Most people don’t take care of their bodies, most people don’t participate in sports nor go on adventures. With the robots doing all the work, most people would simply have no role in life. There’s already an epidemic of mental illness, the Robot Age promises to increase that, but at least everyone will be well-fed and have a place to sleep, at least until they commit suicide. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1375_robot_age.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1375_robot_age.mp3 2:02 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, robots, mental illness no Thu, 24 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Credit Default Swaps, or CDSs, caused the 2008 Lehman Bros economic emergency. CDSs are one of the oft-referenced “derivatives” the financial system is so enamored with. Derivatives aren’t real investments, they’re bets on investments hiding under the guise of insurance but real insurance is a one-to-one ratio, where the payout is limited to the loss, but there can be an infinite number of CDSs issued on the same investment so the loss is multiplied a thousandfold, bankrupting the greedy bank that issued the CDSs under the intentionally naive impression that there was no risk. Of course, the salesmen who issued the CDSs and the managers who got the bonuses all get to keep their ill-gotten gains while the public absorbs the loss for Too Big To Fail institutions, and no one goes to jail. This has occurred multiple times in America’s history; the government even made the equivalent of CDSs illegal after a similar exploitation at the very end of the 19th century. Government also used to prevent banks from investing depositor’s money; government used to require banks to have high reserves; and Freddy May & Fanny Mac used to be under regulatory scrutiny, but all those safe-guards were removed by deregulation, and history predictably repeated itself in 2008, now, and will again next time. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1374_credit_default_swap.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-11_1374_credit_default_swap.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, CDS, credit default swap no Tue, 22 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The economy hasn't crashed in anyone's lifetime: 1978? 1987? 2008? Really? When the economy finally does crash, Great Depression like, the problem will be that consumption exceeds production but the Lockdowns proved we have way, way more production capacity than we need. Something really big, like energy blackouts, could slow things down, but there's no immediate evidence of that. Anyway, so what if a hipster can't get 12 varieties of avocados? That’s why all the doom & gloom predictions by the “experts” on YouTube seem so hyperbolic: we’ve been told for over a decade that 30 days from now, or by Christmas, or a year from now, the SHTF, and it never does. However, don’t be a Crash denier, it will happen. There are forces, organizations in the world, that want it to happen for their own nefarious reasons, the WEF being the most prominent example right now, exploiting the rubric of environmentalism and the existential threat of Climate Alarmism. Unfortunately, when the economic crash does hit, there won't be any competent leadership to fall back on. Every institution has been undermined: medicine, judiciary, media, business & certainly politics. Most people on the Right know of no one they would trust to take commands or advice from. Perhaps that will change; competence does tend to rise to the top in an emergency, but the decadence & dystopia of society today makes that seem less likely than other time in history. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-10_1373_economic_crash.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-10_1373_economic_crash.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, economic crash no Sun, 20 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Taxes should not be a drag on commerce, the worst being Sales tax. A Sales tax is counterproductive in 3 ways: it requires effort to collect, report & oversee; it reduces purchasing power; and it’s regressive, meaning that it essential takes from everyone and gives to the Rich. The simple fact is that a robust economy wants people to consume; that’s where jobs come from. Unfortunately, there’s an almost inexplicable contrary view that regards consumption as something to be discouraged? Nothing really explains the Consumption tax fetishers except perhaps misplaced ecopiety, envy of those consuming, or a complete lack of economic competence? The only thing the Consumption tax people get right is that they want it to be progressive: the more someone spends, the higher the tax. This positive aspect is accidental since their goal is to discourage consumption rather than redistribute wealth. A graduated tax would be progressive, meaning it redistributes wealth from the Rich to the State. However, the best argument against a progressive Consumption tax would be to imagine the accounting shenanigans it would foster. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-10_1372_consumption_taxes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-10_1372_consumption_taxes.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, consumption taxes, sale tax no Fri, 18 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Money is imaginary. It was imagined into existence & and it should be imagined away after the game’s over. Somebody who did nothing during their life but manipulate imaginary money isn’t a role-model, they aren’t people to be admired, and only need be tolerated until they’re dead. Their descendants certainly shouldn’t be made into aristocrats. Without so-called Death taxes, wealth continues to concentration into fewer and fewer hands. They have so much money they can buy everything: media, entertainment, politics; all the levers of power, because they are immune to market forces. They can own every magazine, every news outlet, every studio, thousands of square miles of land that no one else can go into or buy a part of. Until Bush Jr.’s anti-inheritance taxes, Estate taxes were 55%, and Inheritance taxes were 20%; the exclusion was only $1 million. In the grand scheme of things, government income from Death taxes was inconsequential but it did slow the arising aristocracy & insane wealth disparity, which was their intention. Detractors always mention farm families, but farming is corporate now, and anyway, farmland is specifically excluded from Death taxes, and has been for a long time, but it shouldn’t be! What makes a farmer special? Why should the landed gentry get to remain the lords? It’s not a coincidence that MAGA and Death taxes ended at the same time. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-10_1371_death_taxes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-10_1371_death_taxes.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Death taxes, inheritance taxes, no Wed, 16 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Ideology is conceptual so let’s review it: 1. The center of a circle has a lot more enemies than the middle of a line. 2. A test for Libertarianism works for Libertyists too if some questions are left out. 3. Post Modernism is the opposite of Modernism, not better than. 4. The slogan “You’ll own nothing & be happy” pretty much lets the cat out of the bag. 5. People chose the ideology that benefits them and won’t change unless the benefits change. 6. We are in the midst of ideological subversion and the only people who care are the ones doing the subverting. 7. It becomes Us vs. Them when compromise is impossible. 8. Democracy puts the Constitution in peril like nothing else. 9. National ideologies have flip-flopped and Libertyists are being forced to the other side. 10. It’s easy to define MAGA but may be impossible to get it back. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-04_1370_ideology_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-04_1370_ideology_concepts.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, ideology no Mon, 14 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor MAGA simply means Make America Great Again, and that time period is easily recognizable: from Ronald Reagan’s inauguration in 1981 to 9-11 in 2001, 20 great years. MAGA is not Republican, it just wears that mantle since in a 2-party system, they’re the only opposition that can fight back, but establishment Republicans are almost as bad as Democrats, and NeoCons are worse. That makes MAGA essentially liberal, the Old-School kind, because that time period had a lot of liberal positions, for example: free speech, protecting jobs with tariffs, freedom of expression in universities, encouraging families with tax credits, anti-monopoly enforcement, and no one was discriminated against based on race, sex or creed because meritocracy is MAGA. During MAGA, women were in the workforce but still traditional when it came to family formation & patriarchy. Inheritance taxes were MAGA. MAGA is liberal traditionalism but going back to those idyllic times is not possible because the world has moved on. Recognizing & re-implementing traditional things to work in the new paradigm is MAGA now. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-04_1369_maga_defined.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-04_1369_maga_defined.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, MAGA no Sat, 12 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It’s bizarre to think that here in America we live on the side that has been co-opted by egalitarianism & collectivism, the hallmarks of Communism, and that Russia is the one with more traditional values, even more freedoms. What’s really happening, of course, is that it’s the nations that haven’t succumbed to feminism that are fighting back: that’s the determining factor, not ideology, economics or nationalism. Russia is certainly not a bastion of liberty but it’s not a hotbed of democracy either, “democracy” being a dog whistle for feminism. You would think the non-Communist sympathizers in the United States, specifically Republicans, would be the champions of liberty but they too have succumbed to feminism, which at its core is feminine superiority, which requires authoritarianism to maintain control. Establishment Republicans are also Globalists, which are the ultimate authoritarians. If the only choices are authoritarian, Russia’s Old School patriarchy is preferable, which is why people are being forced to their side. However, joining Russia is not a solution, but having the option to do so provides leverage against the Globalists and a hedge against the feminists. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-04_1368_being_forced_to_the_other_side.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-04_1368_being_forced_to_the_other_side.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, democracy, feminism no Thu, 10 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor America is Constitution-based, meaning it relies on a written document that specifies the things that can’t be taken away by democracy, gun rights being the most exemplary, but there are other foundational rights such as freedom of speech and personal autonomy in the form of liberty. These 3 things alone are anathema to egalitarianism and the authoritarianism it requires to be implemented. This is particularly important to feminists, minorities & weirdos who are a voting majority, and getting more so. The last thing that prevents them from taking over the United States via federal power is the Constitution, so expect that to be their focus whether they admit it or not. The new slogan of the Democrat party is "save democracy," which is code for putting the Constitution in peril. What they really mean is that they want to curtail the rights it guarantees. Since the Constitution relies on a republican form of government not to be changed by a simple plurality of cosmopolitan voters, the idea of saving democracy is to get rid of republicanism, perhaps by packing the Supreme Court, or states simply ignoring its edicts. A Constitutional Convention is the specified method of change but isn’t viable because feminists, minorities & weirdos, however numerous, don’t control a super-majority of the states… Yet. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-04_1367_constitution_in_peril.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-04_1367_constitution_in_peril.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Constitution no Tue, 08 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Everyone sees that America has become two ideologically different countries sharing the same geographic space. There have always been differences in politics since a minute after the country was founded but people could still negotiate with each other. Not anymore. Roughly, the Left is egalitarian and the Right is liberty, and they approach problems from completely different points of reference. The reason the two sides can’t communicate, and the reason they get so frustrated, is because each seems illogical to the other. They keep repeating themselves assuming the other side didn’t listen to their argument or didn’t understand, but the other side did listen, they just weren’t convinced because their values are so opposite. The biggest one being that egalitarians don’t account for merit. The Right assumes that 2 people are equal if they get the same pay: for example, if the pay is $20/hr, and one guy works 10 hrs and another works 5, they would get $200 and $100 respectively, but egalitarians are focused on the outcome being the same, so both workers should get $150. Another fundamental difference is “inclusion.” Liberty’s goal is access to opportunity be the same for everyone, regardless of race, but the Left believes in restricting opportunity based on race until the inclusion is the same. Issue after issue is unresolvable because of this fundamental ideological difference, always resulting in us vs. them with no way to compromise. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1366_us_vs_them.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1366_us_vs_them.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, egalitarian, liberty no Sun, 06 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Marxist ideology: equality, equity & inclusion, are not a new phenomenon; these concepts were practiced around half the world in the middle of the last century, known as Communism. The reasons for its downfall are legion but those reasons have been forgotten and Communism is almost in control again though hiding under the guise of Wokeness & Climate Alarmism. Communism, in whatever form, cannot become the dominate paradigm unless the liberal Western ideologies, those coming from the Enlightenment era, are subverted. Rather than argue the issues honestly, because egalitarian ideas fail in a practical analysis, instead they subvert the existing ones, such as liberty, freedom & democracy, with linguistic tricks & oral illusions. Ideological Subversion is the process of changing the perception of reality in the minds of the populace, and Communist-thinkers are very experienced with the practice & techniques involved. During the struggle between the East and the West in the last century, the former head of the Soviet KGB, comrade Andropov, called ideological subversion, “the final struggle for the minds and hearts of the people” He outlined a strategy of demoralization & destabilization of the West, and though the Soviet Union fell before he could realize his intentions, this century would have made him proud. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1365_ideological_subversion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1365_ideological_subversion.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Communism, subversion no Fri, 04 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor People don’t want a new ideology when theirs fails. The same triggers that make them a Marxist: envy, resentment, inadequacy, are still there, so they blame the implementation: “Marxism has never really been tried,” is their excuse. They really have no other option; to admit defeat would be to question their ideology, the one they hope will increase their wealth & status, and be forced to adopt one that leaves them alone, destitute & a loser. If the only way to increase one’s position in life is to force other people to act in a way that does that, then their only hope is force. Same thing with Fascists: they’re not going to back off their feudalistic ideas just because the majority of the population are left out: “a rising tide lifts all boats,” they parrot. The “entitlement” that Marxists are so resentful of is this grasp on opportunity, resources, connections and special knowledge that nepotism provides, and they use force to keep it. However, there is one circumstance where people will change their ideology, and it used to be a lot more common back-in-the-day when there was more social & economic mobility, and that’s when their own rising best-interests are compromised by their old ideology while being benefited from the new one. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1364_no_one_switches_ideologies.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1364_no_one_switches_ideologies.mp3 2:11 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, ideology no Wed, 02 Aug 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor By this time, anybody who cares has heard the refrain from the WEF consortium of “you’ll own nothing & you’ll be happy.” It sounds appalling & abhorrent to Americans but Europe had an aristocracy for centuries, and that’s normal to them. In fact, the Scandinavian nations have the biggest wealth disparity in the world because only a small handful of people own everything even though the rest of their people are relatively well off. For example, in much of Eastern Europe, all the land is owned by the oligarchs: all the houses & apartments that they purchased way over market value but they don’t care because they have so much money and never intend to sell. They rent the properties to the regular people for cheap so no one complains except that they can’t afford to own anything themselves. The problem with vast amounts of imaginary money, many times more that all the real things there are to buy, is that it overwhelms traditional market forces: the wealth is so concentrated that the tiny amount of people who control it can buy everything, and they are. This is how “You’ll own nothing and be happy” is actually implemented. Of course, they pass all this wealth to their heirs, establishing a Nouveau Aristocracy. Fascists like it this way because they strive for concentrated private ownership, and Marxists like the idea too, with the only difference being The State owns everything. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1363_youll_own_nothing__youll_be_happy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1363_youll_own_nothing__youll_be_happy.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, WEF no Mon, 31 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Though definitions are fluid, especially in philosophic circles, "Modernism" came from the Enlightenment, and is defined by what used to be called liberal tenets, though now the word “liberal” has been vilified by the very people who follow them. Linguistically, “Post Modernism” is what came next. It’s purpose was to undermine modernity by being in opposition to notions of certainty of knowledge and the stability of meaning, and emphasizes the role of ideology in maintaining systems of sociopolitical power. Its current embodiment, globalist organizations such as the World Economic Forum, has expanded to wanting control of economic power too. This has attracted NeoCons to Post Modernism’s ranks, uniting the Left and the Right, making it extremely difficult to stop. Post Modernism can be identified by the subversion of existing norms & values, an elitist political class, and the assumption that what other people think should control your life. Its newest manifestation is Wokeism. Obviously, our society has become decidedly Post Modern, and it’s not a new phenomenon because it was implemented in the last century as Communism, whose tenets resoundingly failed, but memory across generations is called history, and people today are resistant to learning it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1362_post_modernism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1362_post_modernism.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Modernism, Post Modernism no Sat, 29 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It seems like any so-called “Libertarian test” can determine everyone’s a libertarian except Commies but there are a number of common questions: • Do you agree with the concept of “To Big To Fail”? • Do you believe in licenses? • Do you support the Gig Economy? • Do you think there are too many people incarcerated? • Do you support the FDA? • Should the U.S. get involved in foreign conflicts? • Should government have the ability to censor the Internet? • Should marijuana be legal? • Should law enforcement have access to private information on your computer? What’s not asked is “Do you believe a private business should be able to force all of their employees to get the vaxx?” because a true libertarian would say it’s a private business so they can do what they want, they’re Fascists, believers in private authoritarianism, so even though all the other questions show you may believe in liberty, personal autonomy & free will, you’re not a Libertarian if you disagree with the concentration of wealth & inherited aristocracies. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1361_libertarian_test.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-03_1361_libertarian_test.mp3 2:10 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash no Thu, 27 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Since the metaphors of Right and Left are so common in political parlance, many people who claim to be neither naturally say they’re in the middle, whatever that means. When asked, people point out the worst attributes of the extremes and deny being part of that, but they still maintain the same metaphor of there being a linear spectrum that somehow passes through them: pro-guns but pro-abortion, pro-mandates but anti-taxes, goes to church but believes in evolution, etc. Because the mix & matches are infinite, the middle is undefinable, and there is no political party that represents them. Another way of identifying one’s political self is by joining the “center.” The center’s metaphor is a circle and has only one ideological dichotomy: at the center is personal autonomy, making choices for yourself, surrounded all around by authoritarianism, people telling you what to do. We're individuals in the center of the circle surrounded by Marxists, Socialists, Fascists, Theists, even Libertarians are de facto authoritarians because their beliefs end up supporting Fascism. There aren’t a lot of people at the center, probably because there's not a lot of room to stand. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-02_1360_middle_vs_center.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-02_1360_middle_vs_center.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, political spectrum, the center no Tue, 25 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The concept of Fascism has changed: 1. Socialism ostracizes the individual to pursue the needs of the collective. 2. Communism lasts until their society fails. 3. The true Right are as authoritarian as the Left. 4. Republicans don’t admit they’re Fascists like Democrats don’t admit they’re Communists. 5. “The Great Reset” is Marxism’s new slogan. 6. Nepotism is in integral part of Fascism, otherwise how could private elites maintain their authority. 7. Recriminations are coming after the vaxx. 8. Environmentalism & Wokeness are State religions. 9. A lot of people have apocalyptic fantasies, and it’s up to the rest of us to defeat them. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-02_1359_fascism_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-02_1359_fascism_concepts.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Fascism no Sun, 23 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There’s a definite shift in society’s perception of itself, from optimism to pessimism. It’s the result of too much success, and other societies in the past have purportedly suffered the same symptoms. It’s caused when a significant portion of people become resentful, morose & perverse, want to bring the whole thing down, and the rest don’t care. It began when the institutions were overrun with feminists, minorities & weirdos, while men, white men in particular, were demonized and male children neutered emotionally and even physically. Jordan Peterson has said it’s too late now for humanity, citing “apocalyptic fantasies.” Others have called it a “death cult” or "mass suicide pact." Look at the popularity of End-of-the-world stories. Consider the Leftist refrain: “Let it all burn.” And there’s an acceptance that billions of people need to die, probably of contrived starvation, so that the world may be saved. Climate Alarmism is the instrument of our death; people have been conditioned to think nothing is more important than the earth so they will sacrifice themselves, their families, and much of modernity on that virtuous alter. If destruction of mankind is the goal, the side of optimism really is fighting against ultimate evil. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-02_1358_apocalyptic_fantasies.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-02_1358_apocalyptic_fantasies.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, apocalypse no Fri, 21 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor One of the fundamental aspects of the American experiment, even though it wasn’t explicit, was no State religion. It may seem odd to modern minds but that concept was revolutionary for its time; even today there are still countries with state religions, like Islam, which is essentially forced on everyone with multiple times per day Call to Prayer, Muslim tenets enshrined in their laws, and ostracization of nonbelievers. Everybody has a concept of what a religion is, and something doesn’t have to include the rituals & dogma to be one. In fact, there are religions with no religiosity, atheism being a case in point. There are movements that have all the component parts of a religion but aren’t generally referred to as such; the biggest examples today being environmentalism, whose tenets are wrapped up in Climate Alarmism, and Wokeness, a religion based on current racism justified by past racism. The adherence to both of these modern state religions is alarming, and seems unquestioned by most of the population. Through the public education system, the state literally imposes, even compels, belief. In the case of Climate Alarmism, they claim it’s science-based but suppress any scientific theories or investigations that conflict with the narrative. Wokeness is even more evil; it’s an attempt to exploit the courtesy, compassion & sense of guilt of everyday, socially-compliant citizens to advantage an elite class, the very antithesis of the American experiment, and perhaps its end? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-02_1357_forced_religion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-02_1357_forced_religion.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, state religion, environmentalism, Wokeness no Wed, 19 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The 2 absolutely damning vaxx facts are that overall deaths with COVID did not exceed projections without COVID; in fact, there’s a new concern referred to as “excess deaths” that is an actual increase in non-COVID related deaths. The second disturbing fact is that one of the 5 coroner-designated causes of death, “undetermined,” has gone from last place to near the top, #1 in some cases. It’s so bad that the CDC, which has become a clown show, now designates healthy people, usually young, who die for no reason as “Unknown Cause of Death,” and the WHO calls it “Sudden Adult Death Syndrome.” Both of these terms sound like satire, if not downright mocking, and are intentionally vague with no intention to explain because anyone with any kind of deductive reasoning ability can see the connection with the vaxx mandates. It gets worse: there’s evidence emerging that the mRNA spike proteins which are responsible for the dramatically increased myocarditis in young men are being integrating into liver cell DNA, and even being passed in breast milk. Everybody who got vaxxed, especially those who were coerced into it, should be mad as hell because their life is now threatened forever. Who's responsible for this travesty? Is it the MSM? NIH? CDC? WHO? Dr. Fauci? 75% of all ad revenue for broadcast television is from BigPharma: that’d be the first place to look, especially when you learn their mark-up for the vaxx is over 10,000% to private health insurers. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-02_1356_after_the_vaxx.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-02_1356_after_the_vaxx.mp3 2:58 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, COVID, vaxx, vaccination mandates no Mon, 17 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Fascism is authoritarianism by private interests, usually in concert with government. Corporations are the faceless manifestation of Fascism: get this untested vaxx or be fired, live by our morals or be fired, basically, do as we say or be fired. However, behind every corporation are people whose main goal is to continue their legacy because that’s the driving force of evolution. It takes little contemplation to understand that one of the defining components of Fascism is nepotism, preferential treatment of people related in some way: blood, jobs, opportunities, experiences, and of course, inheritance. Meritocracy, the essence of liberty, plays only a secondary role. An interesting observation of Fascists is if their uncle lines them up for a primo job but another better-connected guy gets it, they just shrug their shoulders, best nepotism wins; but if some dude from nowhere gets the job because they’re better qualified, Fascists can’t stand that. Liberty is simply not compatible with Fascism. It used to be that liberty was the purview of liberals but the meaning of “liberal” has morphed into Leftism, which is public authoritarianism: do as we say or get killed for the good of everyone. Leftists put egalitarianism & bureaucracy over meritocracy, and are even more antithetical to liberty than the nepotistic Fascists. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-01_1355_fascism_includes_nepotism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-01_1355_fascism_includes_nepotism.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, nepotism, Fascism no Sat, 15 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Whether there is a great conspiracy to control the world gets new traction every few decades. The last time was “The New World Order” proposed by then-president Bush Sr. By that, it turned out he meant Globalism, but it was just the start. The U.S. used its hegemonic power to create the conditions, political & business environments needed for Globalism to develop, and it did quite successfully; it’s no coincidence that MAGA occurred during that time period. However, as all things have, there were unintended consequences. Having centralized control was vulnerable to who had the control. This sets the stage for the emergence of the World Economic Forum and its exploitation of environmentalism to get control of the world, whose plan is called “The Great Reset,” and whose slogan is, “you will own nothing and be happy.” This sounds eerily familiar to past revolutions such as The Cultural Revolution or The Great Leap Forward, both egalitarian based, just like environmentalism is. In fact, the similarities are so strong we could look to those revolutions as models & predictors of what is to come, meaning 10s of millions, maybe billions of deaths, mostly through famine but also through direct sentencing by sanctimonious, virtue-enriched acolytes of the new democracy-based religions of Wokeness & Climate Change. These people who profess so much empathy will inevitable show, as exhibited in the slogan of the egalitarian Khmer Rouge: “to destroy you is no loss, to preserve you is no gain,” which destroyed a quarter of its population under the banner of “what’s best for everyone.” politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-01_1354_the_great_reset.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-01_1354_the_great_reset.mp3 2:59 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, WEF, The Great Reset no Thu, 13 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Fascism is authoritarianism by private elites, usually corporations, overseen by government, who by definition must also be Fascists; therefore, establishment Republicans proved they were Fascists when they didn’t pushback, often even encouraged, forced vaccination mandates. Their easy capitulation is partly a natural consequence of a conservative belief in religion because theocracy is authoritarianism by private elites who purport to talk to God. It seems that all of the constituents of the establishment Republican party are Fascists, even the MAGA wing are probably Fascists but MAGAists outside the Republican party still focus on personal autonomy & freedom. In a voting situation, if the choice is between public-elites authoritarianism that bases advancement on inherit physical attributes like skin color or sex, or private-elites authoritarianism where nepotism is the only path to advancement, why would anyone change their mind? It all comes down to the number of votes each side can muster. The socialist Democrats have feminists, minorities & weirdos, and the Fascist Republicans have old white guys, and some of their families. Right now, the socialists have the numbers but the Fascists are having the kids, with MAGA being the wildcard. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-01_1353_republicans_are_fascists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-12-01_1353_republicans_are_fascists.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Republicans, Fascists, MAGA no Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The political dichotomy of Left vs. Right has become so confused that the labels are almost useless. Even Nazis, traditionally considered the Right, are difficult to place on the scale because the closest thing to Nazis in practice are the Progressives on the Far Left. Yet there are still 2 relatively the same size voting blocks that each call the other side “Left” & “Right.” If the true Left are Marxist-leaning, Fascists/Progressives then what is the true Right? The definition of true Right could be derived through observing who benefits the most then going from there, which would indicate that the true Far Right are the ultra-wealthy. It doesn’t make any difference what their ideology may be, the fact is that they intend and actually promulgate their retention of power to themselves and their families. It’s not just the wealthy, nepotism and cronyism on the true Right has reached unprecedented proportions in America, and that’s where they get their voting numbers. Concentrated wealth in America is literally off the charts but the true Right claim those are good things because they deserve it. The true Right hate Teddy Roosevelt for bringing down the Robber Barons. The people on the true Right believe they are superior, and the true Right agrees that aristocracy is not such a bad thing. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-30_1352_the_true_right.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-30_1352_the_true_right.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, politics, far right no Sun, 09 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Communism differs slightly from Marxism because the latter is a theory and the former tries to implement it in practice. People don’t work against their self-interest unless forced to so Communism requires authoritarianism; a police state that includes turning friends & neighbors into informers & snitches. Marxism’s primary tenet, “from each according to their ability to each according to their need,” divides the population exactly in half, so in the short term, half the people will benefit from Communism while the other half will be at their disposal. Due to momentum, coercion & intimidation, this situation can continue for at least one generation but as the productive members of society retire & die, those coming up have no lingering habits to be any more motivated than they absolutely have to be; in fact, the perverse incentive of the situation is to be on the receiving end of redistribution. Children that have been raised under these auspices can be somewhat indoctrinated to work hard but there will be no highly-ambitious, no effort spared, 24/7 workaholics that Capitalist societies create. Communism can only last until everything deteriorates so much that the vast majority of people can clearly see it’s in their best self-interest to stop, which is about 3 generations. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-30_1351_how_long_can_communism_last.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-30_1351_how_long_can_communism_last.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Communism no Fri, 07 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Everybody makes choices that benefit their own self-interest, regardless of whatever explicit or implicit virtue they may be signaling. People who prefer socialism are the ones who would directly benefit from forced sharing. There are others who prefer socialism due to some kind of masochism, self-loathing or guilt. Defining exactly what socialism is, however, has become problematic; apparently the people who would prefer it want it to be what they personally imagine it to be. In fact, over the years, the Wikipedia definition has changed a number of times: recently, it said: "There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them, though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms." But even that distinction is not universal because Western European-style socialism doesn’t include so-called “social ownership.” In it’s most fundamental form, socialism is the needs of the group supersede the wants of the individual, the opposite of American-style liberty. Die-hard socialists don’t recognize that definition because they think it’s evil; they don’t condone a society based on personal autonomy, and aren’t shy about condemning it. Therefore, Socialists only want to debate about society’s goals after settling on the needs of the group come first. Freedom-centric societies, on the other hand, can adopt socialist, group-first policies when in pursuit of liberty; after all, government itself is based on doing what’s best for everybody. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-30_1350_what_is_socialism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-30_1350_what_is_socialism.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, socialism no Wed, 05 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The concept of liberty needs to be reviewed: 1. Liberty = Freedom X Opportunity 2. It’s difficult to say which states are more or less free but some are worse than others. 3. There’s an archetype for the enemies of liberty. 4. It’s always time for liberty. 5. The next civil war will be Equality vs. Liberty. 6. There doesn’t seem to be many liberty true-believers around? 7. Liberty can be defined by what it’s not. 8. The U.S. has squandered its influence abroad. 9. Kneeling during National Anthem is virtueless virtue signaling. 10. If no one’s mind is changed, it’s only a Pyrrhic victory. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1349_liberty_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1349_liberty_concepts.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Mon, 03 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor YouTubers, as well-qualified, insightful & informed they may be, have to come up with a show every day, or at least every week, so they tend to repeat themselves. Plus, the algorithm that shows suggestions in your feed picks similar things. After a while, all the stories sound the same, especially if there’s something you’re anticipating, like the end of the world, or society’s return to traditional values. Unfortunately, after a while of hearing how “this will change everything,” yet nothing ever changes, you become skeptical and then cynical that anything has truly changed at all: the people in control are still in control, the banks are still being bailed out, and women still ignore 80% of men on dating apps. The wins are not made-up: they did find the evidence that Biden was elected fraudulently, the data does show the vaccine is worse than the COVID, Russia is winning the war in Ukraine, but these are Pyrrhic victories because the vast majority of people never change their mind nor admit they were wrong. No one will accept that feminists, minorities & weirdos are the enemy even though they see the correlation on the news every night. How effective is the truth if only few dozen misfit guys on the Internet will even acknowledge it? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1348_pyrrhic_victory.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1348_pyrrhic_victory.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, news no Sat, 01 Jul 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Many people in America are self-loathing, especially White women, but young people in general. This is a result of a sense of inadequacy, feeling inferior inside but wanting to signal virtue & significance on the outside. Because most of the real social problems in America were solved at least a generation ago, coming up with ways to demonstrate false bravado is becoming increasing extreme & radical, often based on false narratives with questionable motives, and kneeling during the National Anthem is the most hapless. Kneelers mostly kneel because of peer pressure but they do need a talking point for their parents & themselves, so they defend their actions by claiming Free Speech. They use the false equivalency of letting Nazis talk is the same as kneeling, but Nazis aren't talking at somebody else's expense while exploiting society's courtesy. People aren’t forced to listen to Nazis; they didn’t pay to see Nazis, they can choose not to see Nazis, but they are forced to see kneelers. Personally, I’d rather the kneelers moon the audience; at least that shows some true commitment. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1347_kneeling_during_national_anthem.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1347_kneeling_during_national_anthem.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, kneeling no Thu, 29 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor For more than half a century, the United States was the world’s undisputed leader. Mostly through diplomacy but often under threat, what the U.S. wanted, the U.S. got, and no country was willing to say otherwise, and the one that did, the Soviet Union, was completely crushed for doing so. But things have changed: America is no longer king of the hill. This decline in gratitude, trust & influence has been increasing since the U.S. involvement in Iraq, and a series of increasingly bizarre social & political changes. For example, more than half the world has refused to be coerced by the U.S. into Russia sanctions. In fact, the BRICS block has become an economic competitor to end-run the Reserve currency status of the dollar. The Solomon Islands have barred U.S. warships but allow Chinese ones. Africa is in the Chinese orbit. South Americans follow Chinese news, and these are just the surface cracks; underneath, the rest of the world gleefully anticipates America’s demise. The U.S. lost its world status by becoming the opposite of what they were. It’s dystopian now and other countries can see it, especially how feminists have limited sex for men and destroyed traditional families. Muslim nations aren’t going to side with the West; they’ll want traditional Patriarchy. China is racist so Wokeism repels them. Ironically, Russia is regaining its Soviet Union-level influence & leadership while the U.S. is becoming the Communist menace. It’s a role-reversal but neither side champions liberty this time. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1346_us_influence_abroad.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1346_us_influence_abroad.mp3 2:49 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, U.S. influence, foreign affairs no Tue, 27 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Because it’s not taught in school anymore, there’s a lot of confusion about what liberty is? It’s gotten to the point where saying what liberty isn’t might be the best way to explain it. People often confuse freedom for liberty; anarchy is absolute freedom but that’s not liberty: liberty isn’t chaos & disobedience. Feminism isn’t liberty: women aren’t equal to men but their liberty is the same. There’s no liberty in preferential hiring nor nepotism: liberty is merit-based. Unbankruptable Student loans aren’t liberty: liberty isn’t drowning in worthless degrees. Victimhood certainly isn’t liberty: life is unfair, liberty would be using the advantages you have to their fullest. And Government isn’t liberty; it’s primary goal is to increase liberty, and if it fails at that, it’s illegitimate. Liberty is making decisions for yourself and accepting the consequences. It’s a combination of freedom & opportunity. Do you have the opportunity to start your own business? Do you have the freedoms that would make it easy? Liberty is the ability to buy your own home, drive your own car, raise your children as you see fit. Liberty lets you think what you want, say what you want, do what you want up to the point where you’re affecting the liberty of others. Interestingly, even though other people aren’t liberty, without them you wouldn’t have any. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1345_thats_not_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1345_thats_not_liberty.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Sun, 25 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Not long ago, 2 decades perhaps, politics was dominated by men: Republican men were Fascists, meaning they were dominated by authoritarian corporate interests, and Democrat men fought against them for more liberty, tinged with authoritarian-leaning socialist ideas, but then as women took over the Democrat party, it became just as authoritarian, to the point of the battle being the private elites vs. the public elites, and liberty’s really not part of the dialog. This happened because democracy became the primary imperative, and democracy reflects people’s immediate interests rather than what’s best over the long term. The fact is, liberty only indirectly benefits everyone, and only a minority of people benefit directly, certainly not enough to win elections. In the past, students chanted about liberty in the Pledge of Allegiance and had to memorize the Preamble of the Constitution that codifies liberty as America’s primary goal, but where do children learn about it today? Now liberty is conflated with freedom, and freedom is defined as being able to do whatever you want with no regard to responsibility, and low expectations of achievement. Anarchists & nihilists of every kind have plenty of liberty by that definition, which forces Old School libertyists to watch from the sidelines as the authoritarians battle it out among themselves. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1344_does_anyone_really_believe_in_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-29_1344_does_anyone_really_believe_in_liberty.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Fri, 23 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Violence, specifically civil war, is almost guaranteed in America. Neither side, equality vs. liberty, is going to settle for less than their ideology, and both would prefer the world burn rather than the other side win. Since equality is inimical to liberty, they are essentially mutually exclusive, zero-sum gain, whatever one side wins the other side loses. In a political sense, it's Egalitarianism verses Constitutionalism, with one side following the Communist credo of "from each according to their ability to each according to their need," and liberty is protected by a guaranteed list of personal rights that cannot be infringed by democracy. Unfortunately, equalists want to use democracy to curtail the Constitution and could get the majority needed to do so. We’re probably in the civil war now: it's feminists, minorities & weirdos, FMWs, against The Patriarchy. The FMWs have almost all the levers of power which they obtained through democratic means, while The Patriarchy has testosterone and everything that brings with it. Their weakness is that wives control their husband's vote. The one bright note is that since so many men & women are going their own way, fewer women have 2 votes. Also, FMWs tend to cull themselves from the gene pool but in the interim, if they win, Communism will be back with all the death & desperation it entails. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-28_1343_equality_vs__liberty_war.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-28_1343_equality_vs__liberty_war.mp3 2:33 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, egalitarian, Constitutionalism no Wed, 21 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor At the time of America’s adoption of liberty, the rest of the world was an aristocracy, which begs the question: when & what are the requirements for liberty? Do people have to be male? When America was founded, that’s how it was, and whites were by far the ethnicity of voters but since owning land was the actual requirement, other races were at least ostensibly included. How much credit do we give those factors for the existence of liberty? Maybe it was the funny wigs? Maybe the funny clothes or the funny way they talked & wrote? It’s impossible to say exactly, but seemingly, the way you get liberty is when a bunch of like-minded men, because men are ambitious, aggressive & violent, are given guns and told they can direct their own lives if they fight for it. It wasn't a handful of privileged Elites firing back at the British, it was little plot farmers who didn't even have enough to eat; they wouldn't have been there without the liberty dream. These men, with some notable women, were more hungry to make decisions for themselves and reap the rewards of their own actions. They weren’t even the majority, most colonials either still supported the crown or were ambivalent towards the revolution. The reason we have to know this is that America needs these ingredients again to reinvigorate liberty. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-28_1342_when_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-28_1342_when_liberty.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Mon, 19 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Identifying feminists, minorities & weirdos as liberty’s enemy and that their motives are resentment, envy & malevolence expressed as vengeance, spite & perversity, still doesn’t let you pick one out of a crowd, though the blue hair often gives it away. Another way is to describe our antagonists by stereotype: archetypally speaking, they have no mate, will not procreate, embrace the concept of communal living, and feel superior to everyone who doesn’t accept the imperative of Climate Alarmism, their existential threat du jour, a Trojan Horse filled with Marxists. They are the opposite of science, exploration & discovery, having no goals nor ambitions that liberty people would recognize as valid. We used to dismiss these people as an aberration but they are deadly serious, and seemingly in the majority; plus they have control of our educational system, media & society in general. If not you personally, they want your type dead if you don’t join them, thinking that would also be good for the planet. They wrap themselves in the rhetoric of democracy, calling anything that threatens their ambitions as a “threat to democracy,” and any attempt to pushback as some kind of ism. With this detailed description, maybe now you’ll be able to identify the enemy. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-28_1341_the_enemy_archetype.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-28_1341_the_enemy_archetype.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Sat, 17 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Cato Institute, named after “Cato’s letters,” written in the 1700s that expressed the ideas of Libertarianism. is a think tank for policy debates, and is an important counterweight to the collectivist narratives that purport to rank ideas like “freedom” from their egalitarian povs. Cato did a ranking of the U.S. states by personal freedoms. They use 3 metrics: fiscal, personal & regulatory. For example, Hawaii is #49 overall, not in a good way: they’re #50 fiscally, #46 for personal freedom, and #45 for regulations; a ranking which hasn’t changed since 2016. Of course, California is #48 and New York is #50; it’s easy to see the theme of this rating: the more Democrat, the more Leftist, those states scrape the bottom of the barrel for personal freedom. My own state, Washington, even without an income tax and criminal justice polices being among the best in the nation, is a lowly #39 and feels that way. Cato recommends strict budget restrictions, protecting property rights, and support home-schooling. You’d think those would be easy things to accomplish? When I moved here in 1980, it was much more freedom-oriented but has gradually succumbed to feminism, the scourge of liberty. However, our bordering state, only a few miles from me, is Oregon, #46 on the list: there’s a reason they call this the Left Coast. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-28_1340_state_freedom_ranking.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-28_1340_state_freedom_ranking.mp3 2:54 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, freedom ranking, freedom no Thu, 15 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor A Liberty society doesn’t even pretend to make claims of omniscience; it simply relies on the theory of Emergent Order, like birds flying in a coordinated flock without any central guidance. Liberty works as an ideology because the innumerable interactions of people, places, times & things cannot be calculated beforehand but can self-determine into at least a momentary and ever-changing equilibrium, a beautiful, complicated & intricate dance that is indeed a special snowflake in that no instant can be exactly repeated. This strategy of letting liberty solve our problems for us requires that we have as much as possible. Luckily, liberty can be objectively measured to see how public policies are affecting it. Specifically, liberty equals freedom times opportunity. Knowing that Marxism restricts freedom and Fascism restricts opportunity, we should watch for signs of the emergence of those two ideologies. For example, concentration of wealth is a measurement of Fascism, and equality is a measurement of Marxism, and both foster a sense of elite authoritarianism, where somebody is telling others what to do. The most liberty, of course, is obtained when the most people have as much as they can get and leave everyone else alone to do the same. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-28_1339_measuring_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-28_1339_measuring_liberty.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Tue, 13 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Nothing is more divisive than discussing guns & abortion with SJWs: 1. Fact-Checkers can be Fact-Liars because who checks? 2. The new town square has to be virtual because nobody goes outside anymore. 3. How did it happen that the most legitimate news sources are now in somebody’s basement? 4. People are learning to mistrust & fear the new Yellow Journalism. 5. There are serious examples of why democracy doesn’t work but luckily it can work. 6. The phrase “threat to democracy” is a dog whistle for threat to feminism. 7. Irish democracy hopefully doesn’t just work for the Irish. 8. The secret’s out of how Biden’s election was rigged. 9. Tech feudalism is a thing because anyone with power wants to be a lord. 10. If the Internet goes down so does the world. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-27_1338_news__democracy_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-27_1338_news__democracy_concepts.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, democracy, news no Sun, 11 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor To say the world’s population is subject to the fluctuation of energy is well understood, many battles have been fought about it, but imagine what it will be like if the Internet goes down due to war or catastrophe? That would be true disruption; virtually everything is connected via the Internet nowadays, intentionally so. Remember the decade past “Internet of Things,” well that happened though not in the refrigerator tells you you’re out of eggs kind of way; more like all security systems, store purchases and getting where you’re going. Worse, if the Internet goes down for even a short while, there’s at least 2 generations that won’t be able to function; they’ll shamble around like zombies not knowing what to do next since they’re so addicted to social media and multi-player videogames. Right now, when you look around, half of the people you see are looking at their phones, and the other half will be shortly; 4 minutes is the average time between checking. This addiction is the worst ever; nothing has changed the mental development of a population so much, and their dependence upon it: people would go without food in exchange for data service. You can be certain that in the next world conflict, the first thing the enemy will try to do is take out our Internet; not only will it shut down commerce & production, but it will debilitate the populace into stunned ineffectiveness. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-27_1337_if_the_internet_goes_down.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-27_1337_if_the_internet_goes_down.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Internet, data service no Fri, 09 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Tech giants: Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc., make money by encouraging colonization of their dataspace by settlers & entrepreneurs then taxing them or exploiting them in some way, often by mining for their personal habits. Unfortunately, like feudal lords, if Tech doesn't like an immigrant, they can simply banish them, regardless of their investment in time & money. The similarity with the robber barons of America’s past is eerie and mired in politics; no one in government seems to want to do anything about it. Back then, labor unions were established as a countermeasure, but there doesn’t seem to be an equivalent online. The supporters of Fascist Tech’s most common refrains are, “it’s a private business,” and “you can build your own,” but obstacles are set up to circumvent already existing regulations and to prevent competition they don’t like. The biggest reason this tyranny has been allowed is that it serves the goals of whoever it is that sets the national & worldwide narratives: want a war in Ukraine, or coup a president, or eliminate yourselves of a troublesome Middle Class, there is no better mechanism than to monopolize access to information. Censorship, misinformation & ostracization have always been the most effective tools of authoritarians, and many of the Tech aristocracy want their own fiefdoms. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-27_1336_tech_feudalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-27_1336_tech_feudalism.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Tech, censorship no Wed, 07 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor When Trump became president in 2016, he did so through the Electoral College rather than the popular vote. He won by taking the previously Democrat-leaning states of WI, MI, PA & GA. By all statistical indications, ignoring falsified polling, he was on track to do it again but then while comfortably ahead in all of these states, the vote counting was inexplicably stopped, and we all woke up in the morning to find that Biden had made a miraculous comeback to win the presidency by just enough votes in each of the swing states to assure his victory but not so much as make the fraud too obvious. The MSM and Big Tech then censored any investigation and dismissed those outraged as conspiracists. The question wasn’t if but only how was it done? The documentary film, “2000 Mules,” decisively solved that mystery. The scam uses real mail-in ballots, it's the controls that insure the ballot validity that they exploit: sloppily monitored drop boxes, no supervision of who actually marks the ballots, and the so-called "mules" who take them to the drop boxes. The tactic is called “ballot harvesting” and is illegal in those swing states. They picked the largest Democrat county in each and stuffed the drop boxes. That's why those places had 99:1 Biden mail-in voting and counting stopped early, so they could figure out how many fraudulent votes were needed. It didn't make any difference what that number was, they had an unlimited supply. It didn't make any difference what else was happening: the Hunter's laptop news would have made no impact. The fact that Republicans are silent about "2000 Mules" implies it'll happen again. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-27_1335_how_bidens_election_was_rigged.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-27_1335_how_bidens_election_was_rigged.mp3 2:54 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, 2000 Mules, fraudulent 2020 no Mon, 05 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor During the long years that Ireland was under the boot of the British Empire, it didn’t have the means for a full-fledged revolution like what happened in America under similar circumstances, so they had to resort to what is now called “Irish democracy,” an ironic term because it’s actually the forsaking of the veneer of democracy imposed by a tyrannical elite who hide behind the concept of democracy. Irish democracy is not an organized conspiracy, though it is a conspiracy of everyone who participates in silent resistance, withdrawal & truculence against an oppressive regime, rules, or ideology. It forsakes the usual trappings of revolution: no marches, no outrage, no rioting mobs, just simple pervasive passive disobedience & resistance. There are several instances today that require the adoption of Irish democracy, the biggest & most obvious being draconian COVID restrictions, mandates & lockdowns. The powers that be certainly would have kept up the charade indefinitely except for widespread apathy & resistance. Wokism is still a challenge, and certainly a threat to liberty and the American way of life, that seemingly only Irish democracy can get rid of. However, Climate Alarmism is the most pernicious threat since it has co-opted the youth for several generations; there just may not be the breath of nonsupport that Irish democracy requires to be successful. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-27_1334_irish_democracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-27_1334_irish_democracy.mp3 2:33 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Irish democracy no Sat, 03 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Left is enamored with the word “democracy.” I used to think it was because democracy is their greatest weapon but the ubiquitous use of the word has gotten me thinking it’s a stand-in for egalitarianism, and by extension, feminism. When they say “threat to democracy,” they mean anything that slows their quest for equality, or in reality, superiority, because they don’t seem to care about equality in labor-intensive work, only white-collar & prestigious jobs. It’s not about voting at all except as a way to achieve their goals: if the majority goes against them, that’s a threat to democracy; Trump is a threat to democracy; populism is a threat to democracy; what they mean is it’s a threat to feminism. Authoritarian countries like China and the former Soviet Union are big on democracy too because democracy is a big part of Communism: the U.S.S.R. had 97% turnout, and China has over 90% turn-out for their elections; in fact, voting is mandatory there. Democracy-advocates conveniently forget about those sterling examples of fully-embraced democracy, or dismiss them as shams, but how are their shamlections any different than the 2020 presidential Shamlection in the Unites States? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1333_democracy__feminism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1333_democracy__feminism.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, democracy, feminism, egalitarianism no Thu, 01 Jun 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Democracy doesn't work and anybody who thinks it does is deluded. Our Republic at least has the Constitution laying out the ground rules but look at the total tools who get elected; it's a complete joke all the way down to school board level. This condemnation is often blamed on our 2-Party system which makes a voter declare their party before voting in the Primaries, leaving only the most extreme candidates. Mail-in and Top-2 voting is being tried in a number of states but the results haven’t been any better. Even the much-heralded Ranked-Choice Voting got a try but its flaws became starkly visible in an Alaskan election when Republicans didn’t put a 2nd choice on their ballots. The fundamentals of democracy are dangerous, only a step above mob rule. By-in-large, people aren’t thoughtful & discerning, they’re vengeful & perverse; they aren’t informed & egalitarian, they’re ignorant & selfish. Most aren’t even self-aware, and the ones that run for office are exactly who shouldn’t be: they’re vain & controlling, many are narcissistic. With all this working against democracy, it’s actually quite remarkable that it’s worked out this long. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1332_democracy_doesnt_work.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1332_democracy_doesnt_work.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, democracy no Tue, 30 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Up until the mid-Twentieth century, "Yellow Journalism" was unabashedly partisan news. In the 1940s, Edward R. Murrow, a renown broadcast journalist and head of CBS News, made news unbiased; schools were even named after him for that contribution. News mostly remained that way until British newspaper mogul, Rupert Murdoch, founded Fox News in 1996 and essentially brought back Yellow Journalism. Granted, it wasn’t as blatant as times past but it was extremely profitable so enticed the straight-arrow news outlets to follow suit, especially the cable-based networks, and their biases weren’t as circumspect: full Yellow Journalism is again predominate. People watched Fox News because they had a perspective that was being ignored by the other news sources. Its success was bold & encouraging but frightening & embarrassing at the same time; its average viewer is a 68-yo male, which makes the cutesy female anchors a kind of perverted sex fantasy. Fox News was taken over by Murdoch’s Left-leaning son, James, in 2019 which aliened loyal Right-leaning viewers who remained only to watch the immensely popular Tucker Carlson. There’s still real news out there but you have to watch independent-creators on YouTube to find it. Young people have learned this, which has resulted in pseudo-journalists with an iPhone drawing more viewers than establishment news shows. The encouraging but embarrassing nature of news continues. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1331_fear_yellow_journalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1331_fear_yellow_journalism.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, news, Yellow Journalism no Sun, 28 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The news media has become thoroughly left-biased, a combination of Leftist corporation boards and Lefty-proclivity of the people who work in the news industry. Now all sources deliver a common narrative, rather it be conspiracies, insurrections, wars, pandemics, etc. There are essentially no right-wing news sources in the mainstream. Though Fox News is often pointed out, it only delivers a different flavor of the same narrative: Sean Hannity and Mark Levin are straight-up NeoCons who only differ from NeoLiberals by party affiliation. However, Tucker Carlson is so popular he could run for president but his reluctance to support Trump, and by extension, MAGA, has left him in the unmoored middle-ground, which for a purportedly unbiased newscaster is probably a good thing. Conservatives, who tend to be older, have no leaders and no legitimate news source to hear them even if they did because they don’t access the mainly online alternative news. Unfortunately, the most popular of those don’t stray too far from the status quo either: Ben Shapiro, Scott Adams & Tim Pool still won’t say the 2020 presidential election was a fraud even though they’ve all presumably seen “2000 Mules,” so either they’re stupid, not really pulling for MAGA, or they stick to the mainstream narrative so as to not get deplatformed. As strange as it may seem, the least-biased, most adept news coverage comes from a smattering of small groups & individuals on YouTube & other social media platforms. These people are true experts at gathering, distilling & disseminating information on a daily basis. They may not be legitimate news sources in the traditional sense but they sure provide legitimate news. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1330_legitimate_news_source.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1330_legitimate_news_source.mp3 2:53 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, news, legitimate no Fri, 26 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Whether it’s good for the country or not, the social media app, Twitter, has become the virtual town square. Unfortunately, at first Twitter had a hard Left bias and censored opposition voices, including the former president of the United States, which distorted civic dialog and sowed civil discontent rather than alleviating it. There are laws that should have prevented Twitter from that kind of distortion but they were not enforced for political reasons. Free Speech got the reputation it has because until now, America has been able to maintain a dialog among widely disparate ideologies. Collectivism, the antithesis of liberty, was mostly held at bay because the arguments against it was so overwhelming. However, when those debates were censored, the natural attractiveness of altruistic ideas was not counteracted by facts and history. Elon Musk recognized Twitter is too important to society to be promoting a one-sided agenda and changed it to neutral, but how long will that last? Twitter can remain privately owned, as can all the social media platforms, if their protected 230 status was simply revoked. This would make them susceptible to lawsuits and prosecution for any editorializing or censorship they do, hopefully dampening their censorious proclivities. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1329_virtual_town_square.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1329_virtual_town_square.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Twitter, Virtual Town Square no Wed, 24 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor We’ve always mistrusted politicians so when so-called “fact checkers” appeared on the scene, it was appropriate, even a relief, to have somewhere to go to find the truth of the situation. Fact-checking urban myths had been a thing for some time and had been remarkably informative & entertaining. They entered the political arena with a lot of public good will, that’s why it took so long to determine that instead of being accurate & unbiased, they instead supported the political narrative of the Left. For example, during the provenly fraudulent Russian-Collision investigation, Republicans were judged liars 7 times as much as Democrats. Trump was obviously targeted with too many misrepresentations to count. In the case of fact-checkers, it’s informative to follow the money: FactCheck.org is funded by the Annenberg Foundation, a public policy institute tied to Democrats; Fact Checker is a subsidiary of the Washington Post, that paragon of Democrat talking points; and PolitiFact.com is a consortium of Left-leaning newspapers. Private, previously benign, urban legend debunkers like Snopes & TruthOrFiction have gotten into untrustworthy fact-checking, extending their werewolf siting experience into public policy. Even Wikipedia has gotten into the game; a once admirable attempt at democratizing information that has succumbed to the weakness of democracy: mob rule. It’s gotten to the point where the public trusts the fact-checkers the same as they trust politicians. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1328_fact-checkers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-26_1328_fact-checkers.mp3 2:47 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, fact-checkers no Mon, 22 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Nothing is more divisive than discussing guns & abortion with SJWs: 1. Gun-grabbers mostly do it for how it makes their opponents feel. 2. Preventing the mentally ill from owning guns depends on the definition. 3. The NRA has been corrupted but there’s no one to take their place. 4. Abortion has become a weighing of mother’s vs. child’s liberty. 5. Abortion is now surrounded by more confusion than ever. 6. Without society, the bigger dog usually wins. 7. Inclusivity is state-implemented egalitarianism. 8. Saturday morning cartoons were the impetus for the Woke religion. 9. ESG is the manifestation of the WEF’s goals. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-25_1327_guns__abortion__sjws_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-25_1327_guns__abortion__sjws_concepts.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, guns, abortion, SJW no Sat, 20 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor A cancer has infected corporate America, ESG initiatives, supposedly to improve Environment, Social, and Government. It spread amazingly quickly and has crept into even small companies. There are many followers of the Woke religion but not enough to explain ESGs quick ascension. Journeyman hedge fund manager, Vivek Ramaswamy, says it all started with the massive hedge funds BlackRock, the largest equity investor in the world, and Vanguard, who between them control over $15 trillion in assets, 70% of the U.S.A.’s GDP. It's they who insist ESG be installed into the companies they invest in. The problem with having so much imaginary money in the world, all of it concentrated in just a few hands, is that they own everything so they control the Boards of everything, so if they want Wokeness or SJW religions, or ESG, they just say so. Worse, it’s the wives of billionaires doing it: Zuckerberg’s wife was behind the Shamlection, Job’s widow is behind BLM, Bezo’s ex-wife is behind the Washington Post, and Lori Fink, wife of BlackRock’s CEO, is the ESG propagator. It seems too conspiratorial to think the WEF ties them all together, but wouldn’t that be a deliciously simple answer to who exactly the enemy is and what they want. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-25_1326_esg.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-25_1326_esg.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, ESG no Thu, 18 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Though higher education is often blamed for the rise in Wokeism, those students who are converted were already primed. Movies from the 1990s often used “White Supremacists” as their antagonists, always very generic with no nuance nor anything but stereotypical, clearly evil motivations. Even cartoons cast older white men in the role of badguy. We liked those shows at the time and saw nothing wrong but in retrospect, they were the harbinger. The stage was being set for Wokeness but we were blissfully unaware of being conditioned. That was the beginning of the Wokeness trope, that white males are the problem and without them, there wouldn’t be any, at least to juvenile minds, especially girls, since it was almost always men who were cast as the enemy. After a while only white characters, usually with snow white hair, were the visual representation. Those children became the Millennials, the first wave of Wokers. What is happening now for new generations to be setup to hate twenty years from now? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-25_1325_how_did_wokeness_start.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-25_1325_how_did_wokeness_start.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, woke, wokeness no Tue, 16 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Meritocracy is one of the defining features of a liberty society, where people make decisions for themselves and reap their rewards, and there will be a natural stratification of certain groups over others due to many factors. Mature, self-aware people will recognize the foundational strength of this ideology, and accept their place in it but the vast majority of people are neither mature nor self-aware; in fact, they border on narcissism, putting their feelings before facts. This has led them to a new paradigm where merit is suppressed in the name of “inclusivity.” That one multi-syllable word represents a complete overturning of existing culture, customs & traditions, not only for Americans but all the peoples throughout the world. It’s the idea that society has to ensure that whatever benefits & opportunities are there must be afforded to all its members regardless of competency or inclination. No one must be left behind or excluded due to differences, whatever they may be, instead everyone is accorded the same as everyone else and treated the same way, which is a manifestation of egalitarianism. Of course, justification of this concept is the old socialist refrain, “for the benefit of everyone,” but the reality is that it only benefits the artificially included. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-25_1324_inclusivity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-25_1324_inclusivity.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, inclusive, inclusivity no Sun, 14 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Humanity's basic instinct is that bigger dog wins. We try and suppress that in the youth so that societies can form, otherwise the strongest will always prevail in the short term at the expense of future possibilities. Luckily, stronger people were convinced, mostly through indoctrination, to surrender their strength and with further indoctrination, they even became enlightened to personal autonomy, the ideal of liberty, which for some is the pinnacle of human social achievement. All would seem good, except that an even larger number of people, a plurality even, view liberty as the opposite of the social ideal. Egalitarians are under the false premise that everyone is equal and should be treated equally but that's contrary to reality where bigger dog wins. Rather than accept this fact, egalitarians instead try to become the bigger dog themselves by usurping the power that the big dogs surrendered to live without big dogism. The circumstance may have changed but the big dogs are still winning. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-24_1323_bigger_dog_wins.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-24_1323_bigger_dog_wins.mp3 2:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, big dog no Fri, 12 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The fact that abortion has been determined not to be a Constitutional right hasn’t solved any of the issues surrounding it. First off, since each state, presumably, gets to make its own definition for the beginning of life; can a person under the jurisdiction of one state be held accountable to the laws of another? Secondly, abortion is a feminist issue in a gynocentric society where “father's rights” are a forbidden topic: that needs to be addressed. Half of all abortions are to black women: explain that. Women who terminate their pregnancy during the first 2 months by taking the drug, RU486, should not be called “abortion,” and the states that make abortion illegal should remove RU486 from the prescription schedule. And finally, does not being able to politically determine the definition of “woman” affect abortion? There’s also a lot of propaganda & conditioning that needs to be undone. For example, the reality is that children are amazingly resilient, and mostly unaffected by the circumstances of their birth; and contrary to the perception of “unwanted” children, the exact opposite is true, there’s a shortage of adoptable babies. Most concerning is finding out how much of the stigma against pregnancy is ecopiety virtue signaling. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-24_1322_abortion_confusion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-24_1322_abortion_confusion.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, abortion no Wed, 10 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Morals are not an argument against abortion because morals impinge on personal autonomy which is a more important standard, so the argument against abortion needs to be a liberty-based one. Half a century ago the argument would have been different; at the time of Roe, children out of wedlock stigmatized the mother, state assistance for children was stingy, orphanages were suspect, birth control was rare, incubators were new, and there wasn't anything like the “Morning After” drug or RU486, the abortion drug. In the measurement of mother's liberty vs. child's liberty, as in minors law today, the adult took precedence, but the world has changed dramatically in those respects such that now the child's liberty overrides the hardship imposed on the birthmother, at least after RU486 is no longer an option. The only examples of justifiable abortion in this analysis would be a severe genetic flawed fetus that would never be able to exercise their liberty, or extreme danger to the mother whose liberty would be taken from her. Liberty allows people to select their own ideology depending on their local customs, culture & traditions, and the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that each state can decide for themselves based on those. Even then, considering the ease of travel, social media appeals, online charity, etc., if one state outlaws abortion, the expectant mother can go to another that does, despite the liberty of the child. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-24_1321_abortion_vs_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-24_1321_abortion_vs_liberty.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, abortion no Mon, 08 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The NRA, the National Rifle Association, a non-profit organization, has been a political lightning rod for several decades. It was founded two centuries ago as a way to encourage marksmanship & gun safety but in modern times it’s been a political advocate for the Second Amendment, boasting 5 million members. Their power to sway legislation and keep gun-grabbers at bay has encouraged a loyal following, justifiably so, but as all good things tend to do, the power corrupted absolutely. Long time NRA CEO Waynne LaPierre, who started with a modest salary, now earns from $1 to $5 million per year. During the same time he has cut spending on firearms training and frozen pension benefits for employees. The famous Iran-Contra figure, Oliver North, was made president of the board of the NRA, and in 2019, supported by the NRA’s public relations firm, began making inquires into apparent financial mismanagement & conflict of interest allegations by LaPierre. For example, personal clothing & travel expenses of over half a million dollars. There were also $24 million in legal bills. For his concern, North was ousted. Under intense pressure, LaPierre & his cronies tried to declare bankruptcy in NY and move to TX but the ruse failed. Hopefully, honest hands will someday again assume control of the NRA. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-22_1320_nra.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-22_1320_nra.mp3 2:46 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, NRA, guns no Sat, 06 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Most mass gun killings in the U.S. are committed by people who are diagnosably mentally ill so why isn’t the focus on them? Checking for a history of mental illness would be the most obvious background check but gun-grabbers want to take guns from everyone rather than put mentally ill people on a registry. However, the argument against it is a good one: the Right To Privacy; but that’s an implied right constructed in a flimsy but important U.S. Supreme Court ruling, while the Right To Bear Arms is an enumerated right so should easily take precedence. As for implementation, the Second Amendment is unequivocal, making no mention about who should be barred from owning a gun. Even if some court somewhere did make a prohibition against the mentally ill, how would it be determined? Especially when the definition is so fluid: what was considered odd just a couple generations ago is now considered autistic, and there’s no reason that autistic people should be denied their Constitutional Rights. Even schizophrenic people are “normal” when they’re on their meds. It’s no more justified to bar the mentally ill from owning guns than it is to bar anyone. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-22_1319_mentally_ill_owning_guns.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-22_1319_mentally_ill_owning_guns.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, guns, mentally ill no Thu, 04 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Gun-grabbers have no evidence that restrictive gun laws would have any effect on gun violence, as evidenced by the violent places that have such restrictions; no, it’s simply a case of one side wanting to force their beliefs onto the other. The reason that the arguments for gun control seem so vacuous & illogical is because gun confiscation debate is disenginuous. By-in-large, Lefties are people who are weaklings & cowards, but democracy allows them to be bullies, and their best revenge is to take away what they think their tormentors value, which is guns. So gun-grabbers have two motivations: (1) to irritate & ankle-bite the people who they hold a grudge against, and (2) to disarm those who would use guns against such tyranny. Gun-grabbers are perturbed that they can’t get their way via democracy because Gun Rights are Constitutional, not some whimsical thing like drinking alcohol or getting a driver's license. However, these are the same kind of people that had alcohol made illegal via the Constitution so it’s not like they don’t have a mechanism to confiscate guns, it’s just a drastic one. But even the alcohol ban was eventually repealed after the violence of turning half the nation into scofflaws got worse than the drunkards. Turning gun-owners into criminals will result in a much worse outcome. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-22_1318_gun-grabbers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-22_1318_gun-grabbers.mp3 2:38 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, gun control no Tue, 02 May 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review some politics: 1. Democratic Multiculturalism is incompatible with a Constitutional Republic. 2. Is the Leftist takeover of America just in the cities or is it the same everywhere? 3. Election audits unequivocally show the 2020 presidential election was fraudulent. 4. It’s apropos that the worst president ever was fraudulently elected. 5. Does there need to be a test to be called a Republican? 6. So-called “Liberals” are now in opposition to the tenets of liberalism. 7. Belief in Original Sin will indicate a person’s politics. 8. It’s informative to know who the NeoCons are. 9. Intersectionality is Marxism by another name. 10. Affirmative Action sowed the seeds of America’s failure. 11. Reverse racism is more real than racism. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-20_1317_politics_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-20_1317_politics_concepts.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, politics no Sun, 30 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor For whatever reason, even though I've lived in places with diverse makeups, I've never had a racial confrontation nor even witnessed one. When I was a kid, I thought the racists on TV were somewhere far away, fantasy places. In reality, I didn't think racism, the kind that results in actual discrimination, existed even after I entered the workforce as an adult. But times have changed and now I have seen racism and it does exist... Against white people: straight males in particular. The true racists are the BLM types that demonize & discriminate against whites, even so far as to bar them from job applications, which is not the same thing as preferential hiring. The “we apologize, we’ll do better” solution for racism isn’t enough for the racists, who want white people to also experience racism. Not only that, they want white people to offer reparations for past racism, and even more so, they want better opportunities than whites have going into the future. The solution to racism, they say, is more racism. As illogical as that seems, reverse racism is the only option America is offered right now. If these race hustlers hadn't have gotten involved, racism, actual discrimination of people based on the color of their skin, would be gone. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-20_1316_reverse_racism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-20_1316_reverse_racism.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, racism, reverse racism no Fri, 28 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor After 70 years of Affirmative Action, the preferential hiring of minorities, blacks in particular, whatever good it was going to do has stagnated; in fact, it has created the culture of Victimhood & Government Dependence; worse, it has established a Grievance Industry and all the vested interests that implies. Jews were able to establish themselves as high achievers even multiple generations downstream of their ambitious immigrant ancestors, and still do for the most part; and many of the descendants of Asians will follow the path of their ambitious immigrant parents: it's cultural, not racial. Affirmative Action was a crock and a failure at its intended purpose, but what it actually did was infiltrate people who despised what America is, labeling it “White Supremacy,” and coordinating together to destroy America from the inside. All of these people who were inserted into the power structure were united together due to the color of their skin rather than the content of their character, and work in concert to make that the model of all hiring, abandoning meritocracy. America planted the seeds of its own destruction under the rubric of egalitarianism, which were given water & sunlight by the guilt of white women. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-20_1315_affimative_action.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-20_1315_affimative_action.mp3 2:19 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Affirmative Action no Wed, 26 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Often you can tell the bs level of an ideology from the words used: for example, intersectionality is defined as “a feministsociologicalmethodology (all one word) of studying the relationships among multiple dimensions and modalities of socialrelationships (one word) and subject formations.” Obviously, it takes a specialist to decipher what that’s supposed to mean, which is exactly what they want. If anyone takes the bait and assumes that gobbledygook is an honest attempt at explaining something important, an expert in intersectionality will swoop in and take control of the narrative because they’re the only ones who know the language. In a nutshell, Intersectionality is Communism. Intesectionalists vilify the concept of privilege. They claim that things could be equal if the privileged people would just give up their privileges: forcefully if not voluntarily. Take from one and give to the other according to the inequality; not just money, goods or housing, but the redistribution of all things: jobs, careers, lives. Intersectionality has its own power hierarchy: a short, fat, black, homosexual female deserves reparations from a tall, thin, white, straight male; and he is morally obligated to provide them to her. However, Transism, the concept that anybody can claim they’re anything at any time it’s profitable to do so, has thrown a wrench into the Intersectionality grift machine. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-20_1314_intersectionality.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-20_1314_intersectionality.mp3 2:44 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, intersectionality no Mon, 24 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The terms “NeoCon” and “NeoLiberal” differ only whether it’s corporate authoritarianism vs. state authoritarians, both typically foreign interventionists. In fact, many early Republican NeoCons were transplants from the Democrat Party. For a better understanding, it helps to know who is considered a NeoCon: Max Boot, Fred Barnes, Paul Bremer, David Brooks, Newt Gingrich, Henry Kissinger, Charles Krauthammer, “Scooter” Libby, Rupert Murdoch, Michael Novak, Karl Rove, Richard Scaife, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Liz Chaney, Dick Chaney, George H. W. Bush & George W. Bush. There’s actually a NeoCon club, with a magazine, “The Weekly Standard,” and membership in the “Project for the New American Century:” Francis Fukuyama, Elliott Abrams, John Bolton, Richard Perle, Bill Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz & Donald Rumsfeld. Another thing all these people have in common is Never-Trumpism, exemplified by “The Lincoln Project,” self-proclaimed Republicans that promote & vote for Democrats. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-18_1313_who_are_the_neocons.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-18_1313_who_are_the_neocons.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, NeoCon, NeoLiberal no Sat, 22 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Original Sin is the Catholic idea that babies are born evil and must accept Jesus Christ as their savior, which means to follow Christ's example to overcome their evil ways so that they can be allowed into the Kingdom of Heaven. It sounds mystical but that's because it's viewed through the lens of religion rather than as symbolic of how people actually act. In reality, without indoctrination, people default to sins of envy, resentment, greed, avarice, selfishness, malevolence, spite & perversity. Conservatives believe society should attempt to overcome those predilections, always on the precipice of failure. However, that understanding is directly opposite the beliefs of egalitarians who insist people are born good, only to be dragged down by the negative-expectations of conservatives. In fact, the Left goes so far as to blame the Right as evil for doing this. For their part, the Right believes the Left is naive, and can be convinced of the reality of human nature if just presented with enough evidence. The Left then views the procurement of that evidence as reinforcing the evil. There’s no compromise when it comes to Original Sin. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-18_1312_original_sin.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-18_1312_original_sin.mp3 2:10 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, sin, Original Sin no Thu, 20 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Enlightenment defined the tenets of liberalism: innocent until proven guilty, freedom of speech, ownership of land, sons are not responsible for the sins of their father, equality under the law, responsibility for your own actions, religious tolerance, self-determination, no caste system, meritocracy, science & empiricism, no racial discrimination, public education, rule of law, free markets, rehabilitation of criminals, and democracy. Both political parties in the U.S. used to champion liberalism, they only differed on the implementation, but now NeoCons have devolved into Fascism, and Democrats into Marxism. If anything, we are now the opposite of liberal tenets: men are assumed to be rapists, online censorship & heckler’s veto, real estate is being accumulated by corporations, reparations are demanded for the deeds of past generations, courts act out of ideology & lawfare is used against political opposition, blame-mongering, environmentalism is the State religion, victimhood, preferential treatment due to identity & linage, nepotism & preferential hiring, science has been politicized, there’s discrimination against whites & men, propagandistic education, decriminalization of theft, monopolies, mass incarceration, and vote harvesting. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-18_1311_liberal_tenets.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-18_1311_liberal_tenets.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberal tenets. liberalism no Tue, 18 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Now that party labels have become so fluid; for example, what used to be a Democrat is now a Communist, and NeoCons are Fascists; to tell a real Republican there needs to be a questionnaire identifying who is not: 1. Are you a Vaxxer? 2. Should fireworks be outlawed because they bother pets? 3. Do you support lockdowns? 4. Do you fear militias? 5. Do you hate Trump? 6. Do you want to go to war with Russia? 7. Do other Republicans call you a RINO? 8. Are you Pro Choice? 9. Are you Pro Tax? 10. Are you for open borders? You know how a real Republican would answer all of those. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-16_1310_republican_test.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-16_1310_republican_test.mp3 1:44 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Republican no Sun, 16 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Looking back at all the presidents in the history of the United States, Joe Biden is clearly the worst. There may even be other presidents who were fraudulently elected but that combined with dementia and the threat of starting a world war makes him the clear winner in the loser department. His poll numbers are not indicative of just how bad he is because the partisanship in America exceeds concerns about the country. However, a financial collapse was going to happen no matter who was president, though Biden seems to be hurrying it along, and will get the blame because it happened on his watch. Regardless if the MSM is covering for him, why aren’t the Republicans at least calling for his resignation en mass? Why aren’t all the Republican governors ignoring his edicts. Where’s the opposition? Why is there silence? Republican leadership is little more than NPCs who keep their positions because most of the Republican representatives are NPCs themselves, so Biden has the company of the worst congress ever. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-16_1309_worst_president_ever.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-16_1309_worst_president_ever.mp3 2:02 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, worst president no Fri, 14 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor When all was said & done with the AZ audit of the 2020 presidential election, it indicated that Trump won, at least if the invalid ballots were eliminated. Apparently 50,000 votes shouldn’t have been certified. What makes it weird is that number probably would have been much higher except they didn’t audit the signature matching as part of the agreement to get the audit. There was also a complaint that the voting machines showed statistical anomalies and should be investigated but access was not granted. The MSM mentioned none of this, instead portraying the audit as, "the hand count showed the machines did not add or subtract votes," but that wasn’t part of the audit. Even with the information gleaned, no cases ever got into court due to technicalities. However, AZ was just a distraction; voting machines were a distraction; compromised foreign servers were a distraction; as were all the other vague, conspiratorial, evidence-lacking theories put forward by clueless attorneys. The distractions were intentional because the real fraud was provable: vote harvesting in the 4 battleground states of: MI, WI, PA & GA, that changed the outcome of the election. If those clearly identifiable & provable claims had ever been audited, Trump would have to be declared the winner. The only remaining question is: how did the fraudsters get the other 10 million votes from other states? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-16_1308_2020_election_audits.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-16_1308_2020_election_audits.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, 2020 election audit, vote harvesting no Wed, 12 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Is the propaganda different depending on where you live? Do Red states experience the same kind of focus on environmentalism & Wokeness, or is it unique to Leftist strongholds? The supposition is that Leftism is contained to certain geographic areas and the rest of the country is different. However, because of universal interconnectivity, media conglomerates & public education, it seems more likely that geography is no longer the dominate factor. Most people’s only news sources come from the MSM and Big Tech; that’s why people are the same wherever they live. Conservative voting districts simply mean lower taxes & abortion restrictions, otherwise the politicians are no different than anywhere else when it comes to Trump, COVID, Ukraine, Critical Race Theory, and every other government-sponsored narrative. The side of liberty feels itself isolated & alone which is why nobody will do anything to stand up against the lies & liars, and anybody who does is gaslighted, meaning their opinion is discredited by being calling them crazy or racists or conspiracists. It’s the same everywhere. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-14_1307_is_it_the_same_everywhere.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-14_1307_is_it_the_same_everywhere.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Leftism, liberty, politics no Mon, 10 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Many people, especially those that stay abreast of politics, think a civil war is coming, not just in America but in the whole world, between those who believe in liberty & freedom and those who want equality. Democratic multiculturalism is rule by the mob of ethnic-centric groups that share no values other than resentment of the status quo, particularly white people. Unfortunately, those they elect are too perverse & spite-driven to possess the altruistic requirements needed for governing everybody, which is ironic because that’s how egalitarians think of themselves. For example, Canada is dominated by Democratic Multiculturalism that prioritizes the wants of the state, as determined by Leftist voting & deep-seated bureaucracy, while the U.S. is a Constitutional Republic that ostensibly puts the individual first, though in modern reality, elites & intellectuals are very condescending, even antithetical, towards personal autonomy. It’s the socialism vs. liberty divide and Democratic Multiculturalism is winning, yet every time in history when socialists have gotten in control, not only is society destroyed, but millions of people’s lives are lost. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-14_1306_constitutional_republic_vs_democratic_multiculturalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-14_1306_constitutional_republic_vs_democratic_multiculturalism.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Constitutional Republic, Democratic Multiculturalism, no Sat, 08 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review some concepts about fame & education: 1. Like almost everything, getting famous is lucky too. 2. What society considers an accomplishment may not be what you do. 3. People want control to assuage their guilt. 4. It’s difficult to identify true narcissism using self-testing. 5. Lefties can be identified by their perversity. 6. School boards are little more than extensions of teachers unions. 7. It’s obscene that everyone gets paid but student athletes. 8. A GED is a better indication of educational attainment than a high school diploma. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-14_1305_fame__education_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-14_1305_fame__education_concepts.mp3 2:02 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, fame, education no Thu, 06 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor In 1942, U.S. armed forces developed a General Educational Development test, or GED, to measure the acceptability of recruits who had not completed high school. Since then it has been adopted worldwide as a high school diploma equivalency exam. A candidate must be 17 years of age and a resident of the state. It consists of 4 parts that can be passed separately: language arts, mathematics, science & social studies. For each part, the score varies from 100 to 200, with 200 meaning the student is in the top 1% of high school seniors. It takes an average score of 580 out of 800 to pass, and it’s difficult. In fact, very year actual graduates are sample tested, of which 30% fail. The GED was last updated in 2014. The idea of the GED foreshadows self-paced online learning, especially since it also shows the weakness of a traditional classroom-taught diploma, a large number who graduated simply haven’t achieved a minimum level of knowledge. Schools should offer the GED to all their students, regardless of age, to see which can move on to higher levels of education; and a GED-equivalent should be created for some degrees, similar to testing for certification. How the current university paradigm has persisted so long even with the GED as a precedence must be social & political because it certainly isn’t logical. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-14_1304_ged.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-14_1304_ged.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, GED no Tue, 04 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Whatever universities are supposed to be, they’re not intended to be athlete factories, but the reality is that the big institutions are exactly that when it comes to popular, broadcast television income-producing sports. What makes it truly obscene is that the school administration gets money, the vendors get money, the coaches get money, but the players don’t get anything. The most productive part of their sports career is over and all they got was a pretend education with room & board, many don’t even graduate. The claim is made that the sports department is essential to finance the school but if that’s so, how do other non-sports public universities operate? Certainly government institutions should not be money-making enterprises. The excuse they use is that “amateur” means free, but what’s free about paying coaches millions of dollars while the players get nothing? Nor is the selfish desire of fans to be entertained justification for such exploitation. Either make sports truly amateur, redistribute the income and pay coaches like teachers, or make them pro, pay the players and split away from education involvement. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-12_1303_pay_student_athletes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-12_1303_pay_student_athletes.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, student athletes no Sun, 02 Apr 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The idea of elected school boards overseeing the administration of public schools sounds reasonable in theory, but in practice it’s simple self-dealing. Like so much of democracy is, the people who are supposedly the oversightees elect the oversightors. Voters don’t know who they’re voting for, most people don’t even know what school district they’re in, so whoever the Teacher’s Union backs, that’s who wins. Unless the candidate has a built-in constituency, a church congregation for example, there’s no way to defeat them. That’s why most school boards are made up of special interest groups intent on indoctrinating students with political & social ideology like Critical Race Theory, or pseudo-religions like Environmentalism. Private schools don’t have school boards so are not exposed to this kind of takeover which is why there is so much resistance towards them. Hiding behind the facade of school boards education remains stuck in the eighteen century; they’re why new learning techniques utilizing new technology are not adopted, and why teachers still control the system, not parents. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-12_1302_school_boards.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-12_1302_school_boards.mp3 2:08 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, school boards no Fri, 31 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor People are irrational: no matter how good we live, if we see someone who we perceive lives better than us, we envy & resent them. Because of human intellect, we will abide some amount of inequality but in the final analysis the dark emotions will manifest in spiteful & vindictive ways. We all experience this personally but it also occurs at a society level, enabled by democracy. Since the Left & Right divide roughly along their attitudes toward achievement & success: one side simmering in self-loathing & malicious intent, while the other is blithely unaware that they are not only struggling against the vagaries of the world but also against their fellow citizens. By-in-large, Lefties are people who are weaklings & cowards. Democracy allows them to be bullies, and their best revenge is to take away what they think their tormentors value, one of which is guns, so whatever other ulterior claims they may make, gungrabbers have two real motivations: (1) to take as much power as possible away from the strong, and (2) to irritate and ankle-bite the people who they hold a grudge against, even though this kind of discourse is divisive, harming both sides. In fact, most political issues have the same perverse motivation, so there's probably some evolutionary theory that can explain it, but you don't need to know why, you only need to be able to predict it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-12_1301_perverse_lefties.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-12_1301_perverse_lefties.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash no Wed, 29 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor A narcissism test fails at three levels: first, narcissism is colloquially confused with a strong sense of self-worth; secondly, true narcissists don’t have the self-awareness to answer honestly; and thirdly, narcissism can’t be cured; but for purely entertainment value, here’s a common online test: 1. I have a natural talent for influencing people. (This question exposes a manipulative personality.) 2. I would do almost anything on a dare. (This is exhibitionism.) 3. If I ruled the world, it would be a better place. (This is a sense of superiority.) 4. I don’t like to depend on other people. (This implies lack of accountability.) 5. I can make anybody believe anything I want them to. (This is an oblique way of admitting to lying.) 6. People should notice my abilities. (This signals entitlement.) 7. It’s best when I make the plans. (Which is overconfidence.) 8. People often compliment me. (That’s grandiosity.) 9. People always seem to recognize my authority. (Self-importance.) And the most important sign: 10. People are jealous of my abilities and try to thwart me. (Which is projection.) politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-10_1300_narcissism_test.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-10_1300_narcissism_test.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, narcissism no Mon, 27 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor People act out of reasons that are not always clear. The most subtle & common motivator is to reduce the anxiety one feels. One cause of anxiety is guilt, which is often vague, and difficult to identify the cause of because it may be due to a sense of inadequacy, or that one is a fraud; even something as dire & inexplicable as self-loathing is a source of guilt. These are all very personal & difficult to articulate reasons but they still motivate people to reduce them, which naturally leads people wanting control to force the world around them into submission, rather than adjust themselves. Frankly put, people trying to assuage their guilt are doing it for selfish reasons, not for the benefit of others. Wokeness is the most obvious example of this: where a small group of highly-motivated unscrupulous activists, who have no sense of obligation or shared identity with other members of society, have manipulated the guilt of primarily white women, the ones most susceptible to psychiatric maladies, who then demand that all other people share in alleviating their anxiety, and they use whatever control they have, which is cumulatively substantial, to do it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-10_1299_guilt_wants_control.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-10_1299_guilt_wants_control.mp3 2:05 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, guilt, control no Sat, 25 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor If you were to score the accomplishments in your life, how would you do? That’s a tough question because in today’s political & social climate, it’s unclear what even counts or who does the counting? To maintain at least a shred of your self-esteem, it should be you who determines what is important to you, and you should be the one who keeps score. From that point-of-view, how would you do? Would you look in your bank account to see if you were successful or not? How about how many bedrooms your house had or the prestige of your cars? While those things do count somewhat, at least in how they make you feel: satisfied, smug, superior; they’re not accomplishments per se. Focus on values like honesty, integrity, perseverance & ambition. Count the things that caused you to gain wisdom & self-awareness: do you live by a consistent philosophy? Do you set goals for yourself that have a clear path and achievable milestones? Do you do things & go places to never stop accumulating knowledge. For accomplishments, live by the adage of regretting the things you’ve done rather than what you haven’t, and certainly count your spouse, children and the number of your grandkids. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-10_1298_accomplishments.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-10_1298_accomplishments.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, accomplishments no Thu, 23 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Everyone wants to be famous, at least in their head. Not many, but some people actually achieve true fame but it’s not something you can control, unless your intent is to be infamous, for example, aspiring actresses making “stolen” sex videos. Some careers are very popular because they lead to fame, and in the Social Media age, getting a lot of Followers/Subscribers can make you semi-famous, but for the most part, fame is random. If you wish for fame, all you can do is prepare for it’s longevity if you happen to become famous, because the depth of fame is additive: if someone gets famous when a meteor crashes through their roof, and when the news looks into it they find a number of impressive achievements, then the fame is compounded by that number; for example, if that meteor-famous person crosses the Atlantic ocean in a rowboat, their fame increases. Unlike achievements, which can be planned for, fame does not cause resentment in other people because everyone subconsciously recognizes that fame is unobtainable except through luck, hence it causes no sense of inadequacy, inferiority or insecurity; just a wish to congratulate the newly famous person, and perhaps benefit themselves in some way. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-10_1297_fame_is_lucky.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-10_1297_fame_is_lucky.mp3 2:11 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, fame, luck no Tue, 21 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review some concepts about the family: 1. Momentum is the secret of surviving marriage. 2. Marriage Compatibility tests are only for amusement. 3. Polygamy & OnlyFans are the solutions to feminist’s high standards & men’s involuntary celibacy. 4. Traditional wives are rarest & most valuable to men. 5. Transgenderism is what happens when all the other ways to rebel are passe’. 6. A Russian bride isn’t better than no bride at all. 7. Sex crimes are the least applicable across different cultures. 8. Boomers were blinded by their luck and their advice falls on the deaf ears of Millennials. 9. There’s now multiple generations of children who don’t go outside. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-08_1296_family_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-08_1296_family_concepts.mp3 2:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, family, transgender, feminism no Sun, 19 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Anybody who grew up in a previous generation must be asking themselves: “Where are the young people?” They’re not in places one would traditionally be expected to see them: parks & fairs are mostly empty, and movie theaters, restaurants & music venues are filled with old people, there’s hardly a youngster in sight. Even traveling around, the dearth of children seems almost apocalyptic. Not just kids, but so-called adults, people into their thirties. For a couple decades, the time schedules simply didn’t match: older people were going home for the night just as the young were arriving but even that no longer seems the case. Census figures say people under-30 exist in large numbers so they must be someplace else, but where? Two things coincided that may explain the mystery: first, social media & videogames are becoming more & more popular, especially among the youth, and starting at very young ages. Secondly, the pandemic of fear and associated Lockdowns. Young people in the prime of their developmental life were indoctrinated & enticed to stay indoors. A decade ago we used to joke about the public service announcements on television encouraging parents to make their kids go outside at least 30 minutes a day, and now those kids have grown up, and they’re never leaving their rooms. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-08_1295_where_are_the_young_people.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-08_1295_where_are_the_young_people.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, young people, kids, videogames no Fri, 17 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Each preceding generation imagines they are leading the next generation into success. However, it’s not difficult to predict that the values of the succeeding generations won’t match with their elders, especially when life is mostly a combination of illusion & delusion. For example, like all lucky people, Boomers thought their success was skill, but the reality was that there was a gravy train going by and all they had to do was climb aboard. But Boomers were blind to that, instead offering their children platitudes involving commitment, merit & hard work, not knowing it was more about the connections & opportunity. Also, Boomers could borrow as much as they wanted because the debt was covered by the coming generations. Those were idyllic years, benefiting from unique circumstances such as globalization that will not reoccur, and are petering out. Coming generations, especially Millennials, don’t have an ever-increasing investment portfolio to comfort them. None of the predictions of their elders came true for them so they stopped listening, turning a deaf ear on encouragement & criticism alike. In retrospect, who can blame them? They got to see the promised land through the back window of the car, and turning around is impossible. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-08_1294_blind_leading_the_deaf.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-08_1294_blind_leading_the_deaf.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Boomers, Millennials no Wed, 15 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Values change: 12-years olds used to be adults and what’s a sex crime today was a way to advance yourself a couple centuries ago. We now find that abhorrent but there are still 12-year olds out there who are as physically & mentally mature as many adults ever get. If the goal is to let people make their own choices, those preternaturally adult children may decide that the sex trade is their best opportunity. That seems obscene to those of us who only have contact with people who remain stubbornly juvenile into their twenties but that’s because today’s parenting and societal coddling allows it. Since we’re products of Western conditioning, those who are not robustly traveled would be appalled at what’s acceptable in other parts of the world: children acting in decidedly unchildish ways, and women forced into sex. We are immediately tempted to “save” them but that’s another manifestation of our West-induced Savior complex. We wonder why there aren’t laws to prevent such exploitation, and why the perpetrators aren’t arrested and prosecuted? The fact is, these activities are so widespread, and so prevalent in those societies, that a large portion of the population would be considered criminals. Since sex is a transitory physical act, if the psyche of those involved doesn’t make it psychologically damaging, it isn’t. A sex crime is only a crime if everybody thinks it is. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-08_1293_sex_crimes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-08_1293_sex_crimes.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, sex crimes no Mon, 13 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Many American men who desire a traditional family, one with a submissive wife who wants to stay home and raise children, are encouraged to go abroad to find such a woman, particularly to Asia & the Philippines. There they find a pre-Woke culture that produces a female archetype more familiar in the last century in the West. Concernedly, these aspiring husbands are warned not to bring their new wife back home but instead stay in her country where she has family and it’s cheaper to live, plus the danger that she will be negatively influenced by feminist culture in the West, perhaps becoming one herself and ruining the whole strategy. Unfortunately, there is another significant downside if the groom intends to return to the U.S., and most of these “mail order brides” companies require a return, particularly Russian brides. What results is so cynical and exploitative, and so common, that it has become an epidemic: the Russian or Eastern European brides get married to a lonely, socially-awkward American guy, come to the States, have a child, claim domestic violence then use the American legal system to put the man into an economic servitude via alimony & child support. The guys who are the targets of this scam are perfect marks, some of the most pitiful even dream of getting back together with their conniving spouse who’ve already moved on to American men they’re really attracted to. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-06_1292_russian_brides.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-06_1292_russian_brides.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, mail order brides, foreign brides, Russian brides no Sat, 11 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor One of the big complaints of Millennial women, the straight ones anyway, is that there aren't any men that are good husband material. The reasons are cultural, Wokeness in particular winnows the dating pool of masculine men, but culture is also a potential solution: transgender men are the perfect match for Woke women. It’s surprising this obvious observation hasn’t entered the mainstream yet, especially considering the fact that 20% of Generation Z report being the wrong sexuality or gender. Unfortunately, the transgender situation also includes the recalcitrant issue of biological men not wanting to have sex with transgender women: no matter how much they’re shamed, they’re just not interested in what is essentially homosexuality. This isn’t as big a problem for young transgenders who date each other so sexuality doesn’t change anything, while also allowing for transitory transgenderism that is simply going through a phase. There’s also the oddity, perhaps intentional, of a female transgender in a “lesbian” relationship. That’s a case where nothing changes: not appearance, not perception, and their sexuality remains the same. This seems the ideal subterfuge to avoid getting drafted. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-06_1291_the_advantage_of_transgenders.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-06_1291_the_advantage_of_transgenders.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, transgender no Thu, 09 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor You guys that got traditional wives, ones that wanted to be your ally & raise your children; you guys are soooo lucky; count your blessings. Consider all the guys out there looking for that but can’t find anything even though they’re willing to commit it all. There just aren’t enough traditional women to go around for the traditional men. Even when a woman is raised traditionally, once they are exposed to feminism, they’re ruined. Feminist women want partners whereas traditional women want leaders & providers in their husbands. Traditional men, which are by far the majority of men, don’t want partners either, they want loyal acolytes & supporters. There’s also the problem of modern divorce. As feminism emerged, so did the idea of no-fault divorce and community property. Even if a woman is what would be considered traditional, in many states the allure of getting half the family assets, monthly alimony & child support, custody & the house, without having to be subject to the husband who provides those things, is simply too much to resist. Now in divorce, the man still has to provide his side but the woman no longer has to live up to her obligations in the marriage. Considering that many, if not most, marriages are ones of convenience & momentum, especially in such a narcissistic society, why would a woman, traditional or not, not get a divorce? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-06_1290_traditional_wives.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-06_1290_traditional_wives.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, traditional wives, marriage no Tue, 07 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The institution of marriage has declined dramatically for socio-economic reasons that can’t be stopped nor the clock turned back. Old ideas and expectations are no longer appropriate so if marriage is going to continue, the implementations around it have to change. First, there has to be a recognition that perhaps half of the population will never get married. In the case of men, the obvious solution is OnlyFans-type situations where dozens of men consider the woman on their computer screen exposing herself and asking for money is their girlfriend. Guys who do this often sponsor more than one “model,” imagining they have a harem. The lack of self-awareness is epic but the relationship seems workable. The flip side of this that appeals to the hypergamous nature of women is allowing nontraditional forms of committed relationships, specifically polygamy. Data shows that 80% of women are only attracted to 5% of so-called “high value males,” and settling for anything less is not an option. If the men in these situations were allowed, even encouraged, to accept multiple wives, it would do a lot to fulfill the demand of uncompromising women. Polygamy has been practiced for thousands of years, it’s still practiced in some societies, so there’s lots of information on how to manage it. Of course, modern divorce laws would also have to be changed. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-04_1289_polygamy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-04_1289_polygamy.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, polygamy, marriage, OnlyFans no Sun, 05 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor To help identify couples who have the best chance of matching due to shared interests, personal views, preferences & philosophy, there’s the Marriage Compatibility test. 1. What is your relationship? Intelligent, Organized, Fun-loving, Passionate. 2. How do you spend your leisure time? We spend that time together, We have both shared and individual interests, We have our individual interests, We spend it with other people. 3. How often do you talk about your future together? Often, A few times; Rarely. 4. Do you agree on family finances? Always, Most of the time, Not so much, We are polar opposites. 5. Do you get along with each other’s friends? Really well, We don’t hang out very much, Not really, Never met. 6. Do you visit family on the holidays? We invite both families over, One in the morning the other in the evening, Our families don’t really get along, We don’t bother visiting either of our families. 7. How do you decide on a restaurant? We love the same restaurants, We pick a restaurant at random, We alternate who gets to choose the restaurant, We eat fast food. 8. Do your religious views come together? Yes, We respect the other’s religion, We practice different religions and often disagree. 9. Do your political views align with those of your partner? Yes, Mostly, No. And the big question: 10. Do you agree on the subject of kids? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-04_1288_marriage_compatibility_test.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-04_1288_marriage_compatibility_test.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, marriage compatibility no Fri, 03 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Marriage is in steep decline in America, and half of those that get married are getting divorced. A lot of this has to do with how late in life people are getting married: rather than young immature couples growing up together and are therefore conforming to each other, now by the time they decide they want to get married, they’ve already developed full personalities & proclivities that usually aren’t going to change. The best strategy in such cases is to do a better job of matching to begin with but even then marriages change over time: what used to align will ebb & flow. The idea of throw-away marriages is abhorrent. As difficult as it was to find a partner the first time, it’s much more difficult as you get older. The chance of finding someone who is both compatible & attractive is very low, and made worse by dating apps that promise endless options but in reality offer few at all, if any. The best advice is to survive the marriage you’re in but it seems a lot of people don’t know that the secret of a successful longterm marriage is to make adjustments and wait it out, which sometimes last for years: the stress children, middle-aged crazies, affair temptations, evolving sex-drive, etc. Let the momentum of your marriage carry you through these times. The only legitimate reason to divorce is if your spouse finds you contemptible or vice versa, other than that, any storm can be weathered. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-04_1287_surviving_marriage.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-04_1287_surviving_marriage.mp3 2:33 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, marriage no Wed, 01 Mar 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let’s review some aspects of psychology: 1. Instincts are something you have to overcome to be a good person. 2. Lazy people are too lazy to take a Laziness Test. 3. A feeling of inadequacy becomes resentment which becomes malevolence which results in perversity. 4. Don’t underestimate good fortune but it’s not something you can control. 5. Mass Formation Psychosis is a new name for mobs. 6. There’s an epidemic of narcissism and nothing can be done about it. 7. Like the printing press, the Internet changed the world. 8. Passivity ultimately causes the downfall of liberty. 9. A society must protect against people who are born feeling superior to others. 10. The question has become: where should children learn socialization? 11. Your personality changes with your circumstances. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-02_1286_psychology_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-02_1286_psychology_concepts.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, psychology no Mon, 27 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor People’s personalities change over time. The most obvious is awkward adolescence: older than a boy but not yet a man; a lack of confidence in social situations apparent to anyone, your maturity still developing. For some people, that stage of their life doesn’t get over with until late into their 20s but then comes another personality change in their 30s. Hopefully, a relationship with a spouse, possibly kids, the recognition that there’s something more important in the world than yourself. The middling maturity of their 30s transitions into Middle-aged crazies; the recognition that you’ll never be a sports star, stellar entrepreneur, nor even admired by other people. If you’re lucky enough to have children, at least there’s someone who looks up to you. In your 50s, the kids are gone, emotionally if not physically. Your wife goes through menopause, causing romance to decline; your own attractiveness needs help from hair dye, strict diet & the gym. Whatever narcissistic traits you still exhibit are forcefully vacated because it’s clear the generation under you has taken over. After your 60s, you find you’re invisible, and people only listen to your opinion out of courtesy. The facade of masculinity is completely dropped: you don’t even compete in the male dominance hierarchy any longer. Along this arduous way, your personality must change from being no one to being someone back to being no one again. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-02_1285_changing_personality.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-02_1285_changing_personality.mp3 2:30 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, personality, maturity no Sat, 25 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Public schools have failed in every major way except to socialize children, but even that has degraded into creating automatons who can’t think for themselves and don’t comprehend the benefits or responsibilities that come with liberty. Public schools are where the egalitarians indoctrinate children with propaganda and the state-sponsored religion of Climate Alarmism. Public schools are where most children come into contact with people they will never encounter again in real life, many of which are disturbing and psychologically damaging. Public schools are where an activist minority can determine the direction of our culture, customs & traditions. However, if there wasn’t public school, how would children assimilate into society? Without socialization, there would be an epidemic of self-absorbed, narcissists that had no self-awareness, internal nor external. Social media has started to fill that void and perhaps it can completely replace the social skills that are learned ad hoc at public schools. If that’s true, it undermines the last contribution of public schools except as baby-sitters, and they’re not very good at that either. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-02_1284_socialization.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-11-02_1284_socialization.mp3 2:10 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, socialization, public school no Thu, 23 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Your own experience combined with the anecdotal experiences you’ve personally witnessed would make you agree that most everybody thinks they're superior to someone else in some way or another. This would be harmless, and even preferred if it was true, but with an aristocracy, superior-feeling people have the power to act superior. Worse, second generation aristocrats automatically think they're superior to everyone not born into wealth, status & prestige. How can they not, they're surrounded by people who think the same way. With such tremendous amounts of wealth in the U.S., where 10 people have as much money as 100 million, those 10 can do whatever they want; they aren't bound by market forces. If a bunch of ex-wives & widows of billionaires want Marxism, they can have Marxism. Unfortunately, they didn’t gain the wisdom that came from actually earning the money in the first place, only the virtue signaling that excuses their privileged lives. When there’s no connection between merit and power, feeling superior is the natural consequence. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-31_1283_superior.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-31_1283_superior.mp3 2:01 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, superior no Tue, 21 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Christianity teaches passivity in the face of insult: turn the other cheek, swords into plowshares, the meek shall inherit the earth, etc. The justification for this view of life rests on the concept of fate, that some overwhelming force controls your life, not you, and resistance is futile so don’t even try. The feeling of helplessness & hopelessness these admonitions foster turned out to be very appealing & supportive of kings who wished to retain control of their realms against peasants who could overwhelm & overthrow them if they weren’t passive. The Enlightenment was the rejection of fate: the idea that we control our own destinies, or at least have a rudder against the winds of luck. The Enlightenment, at least in America, is about liberty: individual wants over the needs of the group. Enlightened people aren't expected to turn the other cheek. Unfortunately, passivity is back in a big way, not because people again believe in fate, but because they are complacent & aging; at the end of their privileged lives, just wanting things to stay the same long enough before they die. It’s a short-sighted selfishness, understandable in an age of plenty, especially when everything is so delicately balanced that acting in any way could cause the whole system to come crashing down. Passivity is the natural result of apprehension, acquiescence & fear. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-31_1282_passivity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-31_1282_passivity.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, passivity no Sun, 19 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The exclamation that something “changed the world” is far too commonly used. No matter how revolutionary something is, things don’t change that much generation to generation. Even something as big as electricity or the Bomb didn’t fundamental alter individuals. However, a case could be made that the printing press changed the world because it fostered people's imaginations: they wanted to get the freedom to do all the things they were reading about. That wasn’t a one-time thing; books were the motivating factor that sent many a child out of the orbit of their parents. Newspapers, radio & television are simply an extension of that, not world-changing events. Other than wars which change the world through trauma, there’s not a lot of candidates, but one does stand out: the Internet. At first that wasn’t the case, the Internet was essentially a mobile encyclopedia and postal service, but with the advent of social media, it quickly jumped into first place world changing. Older generations can’t relate to nor even recognize the generations raised under the addictive properties of gender-bending, mind-altering, testosterone-reducing, attention-mongering, society-collapsing Internet. Whereas the printing press inspired personal autonomy, ambition, exploration & quest for freedom, the Internet changed the world because it invoked people's envy, resentment & sense of inadequacy, so they want less of all those things. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-31_1281_changed_the_world.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-31_1281_changed_the_world.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, world changing, internet no Fri, 17 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The colloquial meaning of “narcissist” is someone who’s proud of themselves and heaven forbid, they talk about it, then the envy, resentment & insecurity will manifest against them. However, that’s not the psychiatric definition of “narcissism:” narcissism is a total lack of self-awareness that instead is replaced by self-interest. The formal criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder, NPD, is somewhat vague but can be succinctly described as manipulative, controlling & projection. Of all the deficits of human nature, narcissism is the most odious to be around. What’s most troubling is that it seems to be more a result of nurture rather than nature: narcissists are made not born, and it’s happening in alarming proportions, especially among young women. When women got control of society, they made it all about them: equality, #metoo, Believe Women, Girl Power, The Force is Female, It's Our Turn Now, etc., especially on Social Media like Tinder, Instagram, OnlyFans, TikTok, and other look-at-me platforms. This has resulted in the creation of an entire generation of women who have NPD: they are clinically mentally ill. Not only that, their frustration of not being the center of attention leads to depression, which now affects half of some female demographics. That's what the world is dealing with right now, an epidemic of narcissism, and unfortunately, the prognosis of a cure is poor. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-29_1280_epidemic_of_narcissism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-29_1280_epidemic_of_narcissism.mp3 2:42 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, narcissism, narcissistic personality disorder no Wed, 15 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Mass Formation Psychosis, also know as “madness of crowds,” is a new pop-psychology term that was created to describe what’s happening today as a result of social media saturation, MSM narratives & political maneuvering. It’s not a new phenomenon, there are examples throughout history, but it has become more prevalent and definitely more widespread, spanning nations, continents, and even the world; clear examples being TDS, COVID hysteria & Climate Alarmism. Psychosis is losing contact with reality so mass formation psychosis is when a large part of a society focuses its attention on an issue that defies logical analysis, inspiring cognitive dissonance, resulting in a kind of real hypnosis. The 4 components needed to create mass formation psychosis are: (1) decoupling of societal connections, (2) inaccurate or nonsensical information, (3) anxiety, and (4) psychological discontent. These ingredients combine to create a general sense of uneasiness that is focused on a target specified by the purveyors of the psychosis. Though not yet formally recognized by the psychiatric community, the clinical symptoms are easy to identify, and there’s a strong correlation among the people who exhibit it, justifying pharmaceutical intervention, and a lot of it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-29_1279_mass_formation_psychosis.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-29_1279_mass_formation_psychosis.mp3 2:33 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Mass Formation Psychosis no Mon, 13 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Congratulations to anyone who has had the good fortune to successfully climb the economic ladder, whether through merit or luck, most often a combination of both. The old adage that “when I got rich, I didn’t change but everyone else did,” seems funny but it’s true. A person who finally looks up from their pursuit of financial freedom will discover they are in a different world: it’s as if all the people they used to know have been taken over. The simple explanation is envy & avarice. People will automatically assume they should share in any good fortune of your life. Worse, if they feel you owe them for even the most trivial matters; this expectation of your largess will quickly turn into resentment when you do not fulfill your side of the obligation. Indeed, you will need to either lavishly share most of what you’ve made with your old relations, or make new friends who are at the same status level as you. Interestingly, the “fortune” half of good fortune is noteworthy because these feelings of greed are not inspired by people who have simply gotten famous without gaining money: just knowing a famous person and being able to brag about it is payment enough. Therefore it’s better to be famous than rich if keeping old relationships is important to you. Good fortune may not be so good after all. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-29_1278_good_fortune.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-29_1278_good_fortune.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, good fortune no Sat, 11 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Psychologists have identified several psychological progressions, though they’re obvious to any self-aware person. For example, if something or someone makes a person feel inadequate, they first respond with admiration but that quickly turns to resentment. The resentment simmers to the point where it turns into malevolence, which because most people don’t have an opportunity to be aggressive, women especially, manifests as perversity instead. This is the natural psychological progression for humans in the lower levels of the male dominance hierarchy, and most women. Perversity is the intentional undermining of another individual even at the cost to oneself. Societies, particularly religions, recognized how destructive perversity was so taught children against it, but the opposite reigns now due to democracy, where the majority voters can express their perversity en mass. Another progression is from frustration to depression in women, or in men, the more dangerous, frustration to anger which eventually leads to aggression. The most common example of this is sexual frustration: currently, 30% of males under 30 are celibate, involuntarily so, derided in social vernacular by the term “incel;” and 50% of all men haven’t had sex in a year. This situation is also a culprit of democracy. State repression has kept the lid on this boiling pot for now but for how long? When will all that sexual frustration boil over into anger, and ultimately aggression? Young men will voluntarily go to war for access to women. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-27_1277_psychological_progression.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-27_1277_psychological_progression.mp3 2:47 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, perversity, psychological progression no Thu, 09 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Laziness is nonproductive, a modern phenomena, because in the past, without productivity, people simply died. Most lazy people don’t consider themselves lazy, so if you’ve ever wondered there’s a test you can take on the Internet with a list of questions & answers: 1. What are you up to now? Working, with friends, on social media, watching TV, or laying on the couch. 2. What do you do when you wake up? Shower, check phone, or go back to sleep. 3. Do you procrastinate? Yes or no. 4. How often do you clean your room? Weekly? Monthly? Yearly? Never. 5. Do you play sports? Yes or no. 6. What do you think about lazy people? They’re annoying, they’re boring, or you understand them. 7. How many hours of sleep do you get? Less than 4, 4-6, 6-8, or 8+. 8. Do you exercise? Yes or no. 9. How do you spend your day? Vigorously or calm; and... 10. Has anyone ever said you were lazy? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2023-02-07_1276_laziness_test.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2023-02-07_1276_laziness_test.mp3 2:05 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, laziness, lazy no Tue, 07 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Instincts come from deep inside the psyche, and though we can overcome our base motives with self-awareness & intelligence, in reality we are not able to subsume them all the time, and many people have difficulty controlling their primeval thoughts at all. One thing Catholicism got right is that behind the eyes of the person you're negotiating with are the sins of envy, avarice, lust, vanity, greed & resentment. Every human interaction is tinged with spite, perversity, vindictiveness & passive-aggressiveness; even love is selfish & jealous. All of this is controlled through chemicals in your body: serotonin, norepinephrine, oxytocin, dopamine; to name some of the most well known. The amounts are determined by evolutionary needs, those so-called instincts. However, they change slowly as the needs change; prehistoric instincts certainly aren’t what’s required now, and in fact, are conflicting with modernity. In the past, all those sins helped humans procreate and populate the earth but now Western civilization is in a steep demographic decline, and instincts aren’t helping. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-27_1275_instincts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-27_1275_instincts.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, instincts, sins no Sun, 05 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let’s review how feminism affects men: 1. Women maintain control over society by exploiting the vulnerabilities of men. 2. Any test for masculinity involves violence. 3. Young people are no longer introduced to the world through music. 4. Bullying is the catalyst that turns boys into men. 5. There’s an epidemic of Momma’s boys that nothing but masculine men can fix. 6. The Internet: videogames for boys, social media for girls, has irrevocably changed society. 7. Feminists don’t like men going their own way because then they’re not going women’s way. 8. White women are the enemy of liberty whether they admit it or not. 9. Either women have always been crazy or feminism is causing it. 10. The Temperance Ladies have always been in control. 11. Women don’t realize that respect isn’t optional. 12. College has become something for women not men. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-25_1274_men__feminism_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-25_1274_men__feminism_concepts.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, feminism, men no Fri, 03 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor In 1970, 58% of college students were men, but by 1980 the gender gap in college enrollment favored women. In 2010, it was 57%, and now it’s 60% women to 40% men. And it gets worse: graduation is 50% of the women and 40% of the men, for a total 36 women for every 16 men, a 225% difference. It’s worse for advanced degrees: there are 10 men for every 24 women graduating with a Masters, and the discrepancy is even greater for doctorates. These numbers are only going to deteriorate further as there are 1.5 million fewer students compared with 5 years ago, with men accounting for 71% of the decline. These numbers are both causative & correlative: women have been enticed to go to college as the “strong, independent woman who don’t need no man” narrative. At the same time, men have been demeaned, chastised, called “toxic,” and in general, are unwelcome on campus. Considering that STEM is still vastly male, the kinds of degrees these entitled women are getting is alarming, and the government-backed school loan program is political in nature, not educational, and bailouts are clearly over-benefiting women, the most affluent women at that, especially White women. University has become a sexist scam. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-25_1273_women_vs_men_in_university.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-25_1273_women_vs_men_in_university.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, women in college, women in university no Wed, 01 Feb 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Life is not fair and it’s not equal: some people simply have significant advantages over other people, and could easily take everything if they didn’t voluntarily share. Unfortunately, egalitarians erroneously think that sharing is inherently human, and those that don’t share are sociopaths, but that’s more religion than fact. Society is primarily people who work with other people for progress & security, and intelligent people share so that they can have an even better life. In reality, people would fully exercise their advantages in some things if not for another party agreeing not to exploit their own advantage in others: that’s a civil society; and it's greased by courtesy & respect for your neighbor's talents & threats. In this important sense, it’s men who make these trade-offs because they’re the ones who traditionally have limited their violence for the good of the tribe. Women were never a party to this agreement: they’re under the impression that courtesy is mandatory and respect is optional. They indoctrinate children with flawed concepts, of which democracy is the most dangerous: two weaklings can’t tell a strong man what to do without his consent, which he certainly won’t give without receiving respect in return. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-25_1272_respect_isnt_optional.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-25_1272_respect_isnt_optional.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, respect, society, sharing no Mon, 30 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor There’s no clearer example of the power that women have in America than the “Temperance Ladies,” the ones who championed and pushed through the 18th Amendment, the prohibition against selling alcohol. What makes this so astonishing is that it was a men’s issue that women decided, yet this was even before they could vote, which didn’t come until the 19th Amendment. The Temperance Ladies are unstoppable because who was going to stop them? Certainly not men who are held in their thrall, and have been throughout history. For all the indignant claims of ours being a patriarchal society, men only do what women let them. In fact, from a democratic point of view, it’s a matriarchal society. Women’s issues are society’s issues: security, child rearing, education & conformity primarily benefit women. Work used to be a men’s issue but even that is becoming a women’s issue. Everything except war is a women’s issue now. The Temperance Ladies control men because they control the thing most important to men: sex. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-25_1271_temperance_ladies.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-25_1271_temperance_ladies.mp3 2:05 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Temperance Ladies no Sat, 28 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Mental illness is now the defining aspect of our society: a quarter of all women have taken psych drugs plus the ones that aren’t diagnosed yet, and depression among women is the #1 cause of illness & disability. Either a plurality of women have been mentally ill throughout history or it’s a new phenomenon? If of recent origin, what has changed for women that would drive them nuts? The obvious answer is feminism, that boils down to women wanting to be like men, but that comes with the pressures that men endure, which are considerable. It’s said men lead lives of quiet desperation but they’re prepared for it biologically & socially, women aren’t. Women have always been protected from mental stress by the Patriarchy which feminism has eroded so much that it is no longer a barrier. Unless women want to continue in their mental anguish, they would have to reinvigorate the Patriarchy but they won’t do that: no group ever gives up control voluntarily. Instead, using their democratic majority, they will try to enact laws to relieve the pressures they feel but the world is a hard place, half-measures won’t be enough, the end result will end up being full totalitarianism where women force men to take care of them. It won’t cure the mental illness but it’s where we’re going. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-24_1270_feminism_causes_mental_illness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-24_1270_feminism_causes_mental_illness.mp3 2:30 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, mental illness, feminism no Thu, 26 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Liberty is under extreme threat: fingers are pointed everywhere with lots of plausible sounding explanations but the one common factor, obvious if you’re looking for it, is that the forces against us are primarily women, specifically White women, under the guise of feminism, which are a voting majority in much of the country. In the best interpretation of how they’re acting, it’s from naivete and lack of self-awareness, but from the venom of their rhetoric, it’s most probably evil intentioned: women want men to fail, and if society has to go down with them then sobeit. Most men are still traditional, and they do have allies: Asians of both sexes are on their side, Hispanics tend their way, and Black men are indistinguishable from White men when it comes to men's issues. Many Black women viciously claw after what they want but they aren't self-loathing nor perverse like White women. This analysis is racist & sexist & cynical just like the enemy is racist, sexist & cynical… And they’re White women. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-24_1269_white_women_are_the_enemy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-24_1269_white_women_are_the_enemy.mp3 2:06 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, feminism no Tue, 24 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor MGTOW stands for Men Going Their Own Way. It’s an acronym used in the Manosphere, the conglomeration of online men’s self-improvement channels that focus on men’s needs and warn about the pitfalls of relationships with modern women. However, counter to being misogynistic, the Manosphere focuses on how a man can get a woman but with the caveat that many never will so they also offer alternatives, mostly centered around taking care of themselves. This is where MGTOW comes in conflict with feminism. It’s because, other than the misandrous, man-hating feminists, most women do want a man but can’t find one that meets their delusional standards, and the men that do exploit their exalted status or want traditional wives. In fact, a nonfeminist woman doesn’t have much difficulty finding a man to settle down and have a family with. However, rather than change or leave MGTOWs alone, feminists insist men improve themselves and accept feminist values for the good of everyone. Obviously, the problem will solve itself because the population will return back to traditionalists; after all, those are the only ones having children. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-24_1268_feminists_dont_like_mgtow.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-24_1268_feminists_dont_like_mgtow.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, MGTOW, feminism no Sun, 22 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Society changed when nobody was looking because they couldn’t see it happening. Children, boys especially, became enamored with online videogames, not only because they’re entertaining, but because they shield them from the difficulties of real life. Online anybody can be anyone anywhere, and change on a whim to go someplace else. Looks aren’t important, neither is physical prowess, communication ability nor social interaction: people can pretend to be whoever they want. Videogames are not a fad but are actually a replacement for real life. Physically exploring the world, meeting up with friends & playing sports, have all declined and been replaced by their virtual equivalents. This change is visibly apparent by just looking around: all the places that used to be full of young people are empty. Old people are everywhere; there are still families, but young singles, even women, have disappeared from public view. Some of the females are also playing videogames, but the popularity of social media and streaming channels filled with content for women indicate they are also spending their time online. It seems so odd that all the things Boomers thought were indicative of a well-rounded life are now inconsequential to the Zoomers: that real-life to them is videogames. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-22_1267_videogames_have_changed_society.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-22_1267_videogames_have_changed_society.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, videogames no Fri, 20 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Testosterone production has a strong social component; that’s why Momma’s Boys are usually pussies: no hair on their faces & chests, lack of musculature, and their features remain soft. They don’t take risks nor assume leadership roles, and are subservient, doing what their mommas want like their sisters do. The feminization of boys has always been an issue but with the rise of single-motherhood & gynocentricity, it has reached epidemic levels, partly because women want it that way. The idea of “toxic masculinity,” meaning traditional masculinity, is anathema to maturing men but a major component of Wokeness. In fact, 20% of Gen-Zers think they’re a different biologic sex, and 80% of those are boys that think they’re girls. At puberty boys start producing cortisol when they’re bullied by the Male Dominance Hierarchy. That in combination with adrenaline would normally trigger testosterone production but if their mommas protect them from that stress, they stay boys into their early-20s. They never learn to think for themselves but instead require approval from their mom, and never mature mentally into men that would attract a mate because women don’t want Momma’s Boys. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-22_1266_mommas_boys.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-22_1266_mommas_boys.mp3 2:19 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Momma's Boys, feminization, gynocentric, masculinity no Wed, 18 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Traditional male-style bullying has been demonized, nearly criminalized in the West, by women with no regard to the damage that causes society because they have no idea what it is? Mother’s think their boys are being picked on by the larger kids, and that’s the end of their analysis, but bullying is part of the transition of boys into men: it’s essential for testosterone production, and the masculinity that comes from that. Women don’t understand how lack of bullying at puberty creates wusses. In fact, most people don’t understand the connection because they don’t want to, especially in a gynocentric society. Puberty is the time when boys can physically start creating testosterone but it needs to be triggered by stress. Stress in the medical sense, meaning cortisol production which coincidences with adrenaline production which triggers testosterone production. In the past this stress could come from hunting, and in modern times it can come from physical sports, but for most boys, it comes from bullying, which any man knows is highly stressful: fear & anxiety produce adrenaline. It starts young, shepherding physical maturity until the bullied become the bullies; not the stereotypical comic book ruffian, but the induction into manhood-guidance kind, but the threat does have to be there to induce stress. Worse, without bullying, boys don’t learn how to respond to bullying, which is going to happen eventually, and men bullying men who don’t know how to defend themselves always turns out badly. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-22_1265_bullying.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-22_1265_bullying.mp3 2:38 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, bully, bullying no Mon, 16 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The music of today is for pussies compared to the Rock era. Songs & bands used to be frightening to prepubescent boys, and girls didn’t even listen to them. Musicians had long hair & huge beards; they were unkempt & wore strange clothes. Grunge came along, and it was very dark: many of the lead singers of that era OD’ed or committed suicide. But Hip-hop isn’t scary, not even Rap, and today’s Pop music is inclusive & coddling. Rock-N-Roll died because now kids are too scared to listen to it. But that’s not enough of an explanation because there’s been a decline in music in general. Streaming & Internet piracy can be blamed for some of that but the issue runs even more deeply. In the past, music expanded listeners experiences, as did cars & sports. People went outside and attended events because there was nothing to do at home, and music was a huge part of that. Nowadays, young people, the ones thirsting for companionship & new experiences, have social media & videogaming. The only music they like is the music that’s incorporated into their virtual environment. This is the same reason young people seem to be missing from society at large: it’s because they’re in their own society online. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-20_1264_the_decline_of_music.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-20_1264_the_decline_of_music.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, rock music no Sat, 14 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The stereotype of masculinity is demonstrated by an online self-test of 10 questions, beginning with. “What do you do if you’re punched?” followed by 3 choices: Start crying and run away, turn the other cheek or fight back. The second question is: “Probability of you crying during a movie?” gauged on a 1 to 10 scale. The third is: “You have a girlfriend but a very attractive girl makes a pass?” is answered by clicking among face icons: frown, irritated, ho-hum, oh yeah, ready to get down. “Your house is a mess and friends are coming over, what do you do?” Clean up, pile things in a back room, no big deal. “What do you do after a first date?” Call her back, add her to the rotation, ghost her. “What if you’re drunk & feeling sad?” Do you go to bed, call your ex or get in a fight? “You’re in an auto accident and a musclebound guy gets out of the other car: what do you do?” Lock your doors, laugh nervously, get out & resolve the issue. “What do you do first at the gym?” Work out, sip a smoothie, take a mirror selfie. Then answer “How do you feel after eating 2 Big Macs, large fries & 32 oz. Coke?” with 1 to 5 stars. The last question is to choose among 3 pictures: a beautiful woman, a mountain bike or a masculine-looking male. How would you score? Personally, I think it was more of test for autism. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-20_1263_masculinity_test.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-20_1263_masculinity_test.mp3 2:49 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, masculinity test no Thu, 12 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Women have recognized that they are in control of the world. This has not led to a safer more understanding planet, the opposite instead: run away inflation, homelessness & internal discord. The political process has completely broken down, as has the separation of powers. Crime is no longer under control, education is more indoctrination than training young people how to improve themselves, climate cultism has become the new religion, and there’s even contemplation of a nuclear world war. How did this happen? How did the Matriarchy overcome the Patriarchy? Because of testosterone women cannot compete head-to-head with men so they have to stab through the cracks in men’s armor, which are: (1) democracy, the idea that 2 weak women can tell a strong man what to do; (2) exploit men’s courtesy & natural reticence to conflict with women; and (3) men will submit to women to get sex. All of these vulnerabilities are self-inflicted, and men could get back in control using their testosterone as their superpower, but that’s also been reduced so much that many men think they’re women, expanding their vulnerabilities even more. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-20_1262_mens_vulnerabilities.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-20_1262_mens_vulnerabilities.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, men's vulnerabilities no Tue, 10 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let’s review our civics roundup: 1. The elimination of Capital Punishment in a society is the first precursor of its decline. 2. The sides are clear for a new civil war but its not so clear how it ends? 3. Whichever side wins politically, the losing side will start a rebellion. 4. The die has been cast how male Supreme Court nominees will be treated from now on. 5. Nepotism is the end of traditional liberalism. 6. Emigration does more to degrade the world than any other thing. 7. Leaving the U.S. for someplace with more freedom is no longer unimaginable. 8. The best recruits no longer enlist in the military. 9. Genocide works which is why people have to be repelled by the very thought. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-18_1261_civics_roundup_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-18_1261_civics_roundup_concepts.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, civil war, civics no Sun, 08 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The word "genocide” generates a visceral reaction in people. That aversion to the concept is intentionally taught because, frankly, genocide, mass indiscriminate killing, works, and is too easy to implement. Many of history’s most troublesome people problems were solved by simply mass eliminating the people. Occupying armies killed everyone in a village if there was an act of rebellion by even one member. History is full of holdouts, disliked populations, whole regions defying authority, and when enough of them were killed, sometimes all, they gave up. This reluctance to use genocide is a modern day phenomenon, only 70 years ago we did it: 2 nukes to stop imperial Japan, and Germany's civilian population was intentionally fire-bombed. We're too civilized to even consider those measures today so the threat is no longer palpable, but if we banish it from possibility then we give the enemy a big advantage. That’s not acceptable, so the West plays poker with the world after hiding the genocide aces under the table & pretending they don't exist, mostly in secret labs and submarines. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-18_1260_genocide.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-18_1260_genocide.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, genocide no Fri, 06 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor It used to be that along with fireman & police, “soldier” was something children said they wanted to be when they grew up. Toy guns were very popular with boys, and everyone admired the military and those who served in it. When having a strong military was essential for national security, this reverence was required: most parents will only allow their young men to fight & die in wars for hearth & home. Unfortunately, just two generations after America became the undisputed military world leader, no longer under threat from anybody, the military has lost most of its luster, and all of its credibility. Leftists question its existence or even outright condemn it, and their abhorrence of guns is legendary. Today’s military is now about something else entirely, something not even related to the military’s intended purpose which was to protect America from foreign threats. The senior advisor to the Secretary of Defense for Human Capital said the need for diversity, equity and inclusion is now part of all decisions in the military. Notably, the infamous “My 2 Mommies” army recruitment advertisement is a stunning example of this: a cartoon of a little girl raised by lesbians who cares for the environment & marches for equality. At the same time, the existing army has been purged of many experienced veterans as potential “domestic terrorists.” The result is that the young people the military used to rely on for recruitment, the most capable & patriotic, are now shunning it, such that military enlistment has completely collapsed, and if there’s a draft, unwilling men can evade it by claiming to be transwomen. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-18_1259_military_enlistment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-18_1259_military_enlistment.mp3 2:59 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, military enlistment no Wed, 04 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor There are walled enclaves in Panama and other places filled with American expatriates. Some do it because they can live there for less, others do it to escape American taxes, but more & more are doing it because as hard as it is to believe, a compound in Central America is better than living in the U.S. This is a relatively new phenomena, initiated by the COVID overreaction, but that hysteria has migrated into politics, and morphed into something dystopian that can only lead to some kind of new civil war. Consider the current war on men: not only are they turning boys into girls, they denigrate masculinity and the pride one should feel for one’s accomplishments. The media continually says derogatory things about traditional culture, customs & traditions; and there’s contempt from Millennials towards Boomers, and vice versa. It’s gotten worse & worse as Wokeism consumes every niche of life. Many old white men have to rethink staying in the U.S. to escape how uncomfortable everyday life has become, or possibly even for their very own safety. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-18_1258_leaving_the_us.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-18_1258_leaving_the_us.mp3 2:09 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, emigration from U.S., expatriots no Mon, 02 Jan 2023 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Those who look to eugenics to confirm their world view that some races are inferior, point to the backwards and often failed nations in Africa and the Third World. What they don’t take into account is that these places do indeed produce exceptional people: the distribution may not be as high as in the West but there are certainly enough to drag their nations out of poverty & lawlessness. In fact, there was a time about half-a-century ago, when that was happening. The Third World standard-of-living was substantially increasing because high caliber students from those countries were educated by the West then they went home to act as leaders and organizers, but that was before Globalization, and the idea of open borders it fosters. Now the U.S. and other Western nations take all trained nurses, engineers, entrepreneurs & anyone of high caliber, stripping the emigrating nation of their rawest of raw materials. It may be good for West but it’s terrible for the nation that loses the flower of its people, yet the moralists say nothing because America benefits by degrading the of the rest of the world, as usual. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-16_1257_emigration_degradation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-16_1257_emigration_degradation.mp3 2:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, emigration degradation no Sat, 31 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Liberalism was the idea that merit should be the determining factor when selecting from job & college applicants. Before that, the class someone was born into determined those things. Nepotism, familial relationships & fraternal connections, played the biggest part of who got what. Without government holding back the gatekeepers, merit would mean nothing because all the opportunity would be hoarded by nepotistic interests. Until relatively recently, admittance into university required connections & cash, but with government founding of State universities, which admitted based purely on merit and at low cost, enrollment soared. Similarly, previous generations couldn’t get a good job without knowing someone but government espoused the idea of merit to counteract discrimination and big business followed. Even starting a business without nepotism used to be almost impossible but liberalism led to companies using a merit criteria, and supply chains were no longer exclusive to special interests. The influence of nepotism was lessened for a few generations but, unfortunately, with the advent of Affirmative Action, preferential hiring, Wokeism and a dramatic stratification of wealth, the nepotists are back. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-16_1256_nepotism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-16_1256_nepotism.mp3 2:15 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, nepotism, government no Thu, 29 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor When Democrats nominated Ketanji Jackson to become the newest justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, her House hearings & Senate confirmation sailed through without a hitch even though she couldn’t define what a “woman” was. (She said she’s not a biologist.) However, when Republicans nominate a justice, it’s a theater of histrionics & lies. It started 4 decades ago with “Borking,” when Robert Bork was not confirmed because the ruckus was too much for Republicans to endure, but it’s gone way beyond that. For male nominees, Democrats have a "Rapist" folder waiting. They get a woman to make unfounded accusations, as was the case with Clarence Thomas. His accuser, Anita Hill, was turned into a millionaire celebrity. Brent Kavanaugh had to endure the most strident Witch Hunt ever, showing if 1 woman isn’t enough, they’ll get 2, 3, however many it takes to thoroughly destroy a male Republican nominee’s reputation. There won’t be any more male nominees from the Democrats: Biden stated he would only select Black females. For their part, Republicans successfully held up Merrick Garland’s confirmation, thank goodness, because when he was subsequently appointed U.S. Attorney General he showed his partisan spots, including weaponizing the Justice Department, particularly the FBI. The Supreme Court is just politics obscured under black robes. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-16_1255_supreme_court_nominees.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-16_1255_supreme_court_nominees.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, supreme court nominees no Tue, 27 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor America has divided into two very opposing camps, both of which could spark a rebellion. As of now, the Left has been steadily gaining ground for a multitude of reasons, but demographics is the biggest: young people have been co-opted. These youngsters want to establish a new set of values that overshadow liberty & freedom, and if they don’t get their way, as we’ve already seen, they will riot in the streets. Finally, those that value our existing customs, culture & traditions have started to push back, which will cause more riots, and calls for authoritarianism, which will lead to calls for a rebellion from the rest of us. There are 2 possible outcomes: the Patriarchy falls or the Patriarchy dominates, getting back control of education & media to bring young people back to liberty-based thinking. Most likely though, rather than a rebellion, it will be a shambellion that makes money for the elites who are actually in charge, and they will dictate our new lifestyles to benefit themselves. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-14_1254_rebellion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-14_1254_rebellion.mp3 2:01 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, freedom, rebellion no Sun, 25 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor There’s no doubt the United States is united in name only. We no longer share common values, in fact, we have starkly opposing foundational ideology that cannot be compromised away. Half are Covidians & Climate Alarmists; they don’t think Biden’s election was fraudulent; they faithfully follow the MSM narrative; and they don’t want anyone thinking differently from them. America as we knew it is over; obviously, some kind of new civil war is coming. Most likely, it will be virtual, each side only interacting with themselves both online and IRL. The fact that you can’t be fired for pulling your dick out in a women’s restroom but can for following Trump on social media, and that a white guy in Buffalo Lodge hat, his face painted red, white & blue is an “insurrectionist” while black balaclava-wearing, Molotov cocktail-throwing Millennials are just LARPing, indicates that the other side controls all the levers of power. However, should real fighting actually occur, how would that come out? The military is mostly made of Red State folks, 80% Conservative. The National Guards are controlled by the Conservative States, and Conservatives own the majority of private firearms, 300 million, and most are trained to use them. BLM, Wokesters, environmentalists, anarchists, whoever thinks the Feds are going to be running the show in a revolution are absolutely kidding themselves. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-14_1253_sides_in_the_new_civil_war.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-14_1253_sides_in_the_new_civil_war.mp3 2:46 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, civil war, revolution no Fri, 23 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The American prison system is a sad, ridiculous gulag. The worst part is that it cures nothing: recidivism is expected so its primary purpose is vengance and to keep dangerous people away from the rest of us. Many prisoners who in the past were executed for their heinous acts, are now housed at tremendous expense for the rest of their lives, serving as inspiration & mentors to young inmates. The solution, of course, is to go back to capital punishment, however, the democratic process has made that virtually impossible. Why? Is it because people believe any life is better than the alternative? Human life is not the primary importance: if it was we wouldn't send soldiers to die for political objectives, we wouldn't allow people to smoke for private profit, and we wouldn't allow people to drink alcohol for recreation; even convenience is more important to us than life, as evidenced by letting people drive automobiles. There’s also direct killing such as abortion, ending life support, and assisted suicide, yet none of those people are a threat to the rest of us like hardened psychopaths who are warehoused rather than permanently removed as a threat. Heaven forbid what will happen if civilization completely breaks down and the jail cells are opened. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-14_1252_capital_punishment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-14_1252_capital_punishment.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, capital punishment, death penalty no Wed, 21 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let’s review how the law affects society: 1. Forensic accounting is for people who want to solve crimes without leaving their desk. 2. Vaccine mandates showed just how fragile the support for liberty is in America. 3. If government can’t get its way, it forms a fascist cabal with business. 4. Patenting DNA is essentially patenting God’s work. 5. The Administrative State is the authoritarian fourth branch of government. 6. Society is so broken there isn’t any way to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. 7. Pulling yourself up by your bootstraps assumes you have some. 8. The Left has co-opted existing institutions rather than making their own. 9. It’s too late for depopulation control because the population control people got there first. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-12_1251_law__society_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-12_1251_law__society_concepts.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, society no Mon, 19 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Modern secular societies like in the West aren’t sustainable because they simply don’t produce the one thing that every successful society must have: children. Feminism is the culprit but it didn’t become apparent until it was too late: the indoctrination needed to convince young people to marry and have kids had to start 30 years ago. In previous societies of the past, the rulers recognized that women bearing children was more important than them working so they created religions that purported to give justification of this edict from God. Who else could convince a woman to take on such a heavy burden rather than commit infanticide. Given the choice, most women think most men are unattractive as a mate, and for the few men who can attract a mate, modern societies put most of the financial responsibility of marriage on them, so now they hesitate to make that commitment. The result is, in aggregate, modern women don’t have enough children for simple population replacement. There’s also practical limitations: with high-density urbanization, there simply is no physical room for children. Also, Climate Alarmism casts children, especially the offspring of white people, as a negative. But it’s not going to be the environment, or an asteroid, or nuclear war that destroys modernity, it will be empty wombs. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-12_1250_depopulation_control.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-12_1250_depopulation_control.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, society, population control no Sat, 17 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The Left is claiming the Right is trying to tear down institutions & overthrow democracy, and the Right thinks it’s the exact opposite, but it’s actually a matter of perspective. From the Right’s point of view, they cherish the institutions as they used to be, but not as they are now. While the traditionalists were not paying attention, the Left subverted everything to support their new value system, and it’s almost a complete takeover, so the Left is correct, it’s the Right who want to break media, education & judiciary’s hold on America. Using democracy, the Left successfully infiltrated all the institutions. It was a loosely coordinated operation that began in the 1960s and finished during Obama’s presidency. It happened because we allowed the narrative to make democracy America's primary imperative rather than liberty. When the Right finally objected, the Left logically see them as trying to subvert democracy. The Right must fight back but understand they’re the bad guys here, and they’re the minority. However, the American revolutionaries were also in a minority when they fought for liberty & freedom. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-12_1249_tearing_down_institutions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-12_1249_tearing_down_institutions.mp3 2:10 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, institutions no Thu, 15 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor When I was young, society formed my expectations, and those things were reasonably achieved. My wife & I, both in our early 20s, got 4-year college degrees while working part-time. We lived on our own with no family help, raised 3 kids, bought a house and a car. We didn’t have much leftover money for entertainment so once a week we went to the cheapo theater and ate at Taco Bell. It was called “pulling yourself up by your bootstraps,” which means you can raise yourself without help from anything or anybody. That was certainly MAGA. What the hell happened? If I was 20 now, I'd be pissed too: no spouse, no career, no future; compounded by the fact that people’s expectations far exceed what society can deliver. Nowadays, everyone wants to be rich & famous, and they don’t have the self-awareness to know it’s just wishful thinking. Then after a few years of not achieving their unrealistic goals, they get resentful & perverse, which doesn’t lead to anyplace good, like where we are now. Entire cities are filled with people who don’t even have bootstraps. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-12_1248_bootstraps.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-12_1248_bootstraps.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, bootstraps, society no Tue, 13 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor For most of its history, American society preached self-determination & personal autonomy. You don’t consider your fellow society members as partners but you see them as allies. You don't have to like your allies, you don't even have to respect them, you only have to live up to your half of the agreement, and they theirs. This liberty-based ideology results in wildly disparate outcomes because we each benefit from or suffer the consequences of our own actions. Unfortunately, a complete society only works if we all think that way, or at least a majority do. Global connectedness brought along with it a lot perversity: immature people who would sacrifice their own well being as long as those they resent are chasened too. They want successful people to be penalized rather than try to improve their own well-being. Scarily, there’s enough of them, and they are disolute enough, that they riot in the streets if they don’t get their way, and are seemingly above the law. When someone in a black balaclava openly threatens you, that’s the very definition of a broken society. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-10_1247_broken_society.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-10_1247_broken_society.mp3 2:11 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, society, broken no Sun, 11 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The Constitution set up 3 branches of government: executive, legislative & judicial; the idea being that they were in an adversarial relationship with each other, meaning each was the other’s watchdog, and all at the mercy of democracy. Authoritarians don’t operate well in plain sight so a forth branch of government was haphazardly created of career bureaucrats & administrators, the so-called “Deep State.” These people have no oversight, can not be fired, and are not subject to election outcomes. They can write regulations under the facade of law, oversee and enforce them, including draconian penalties, and there is no real appeal: the cost of pursuing a judicial remedy is simply too time consuming & expensive. Luckily, a TV host hedge fund manager with an ego to match, George Jarkesy Jr., did pursue an unjust judgment against him through serpentine court hearings, and the 5th Circuit. They found for all three points: the Legislative branch can't transfer their duties, all defendants can demand a jury trial, and the Administrative branch is indeed subject to the Executive branch. The result means the end of the Administrative State and they’ll want their unfettered power back so expect Deep State retaliation. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-10_1246_administrative_state.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-10_1246_administrative_state.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, administrative state no Fri, 09 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Patents, especially where it’s health related, have always been problematic, but in the case of patenting genes it’s obscene. Patents aren’t supposed to be granted to discovery: if something exists in nature, the medicinal properties of a plant for example, maybe the special preparation of the medicine can be patented but not the ingredient derived from the plant. Other people can prepare it in another way. In the case of DNA, however, patents have been allowed for identifying specific genes, essentially prohibiting other business interests that could take advantage of that information for their own products. Consider the gene sequence that’s predictive of breast cancer, BRAC. The researchers who identified the connection were granted a patent on it. How can anybody else work on cures for breast cancer if BRAC belongs to somebody? For example, if a company developed a treatment such as a nanobot gene-splicer that targeted BRAC and repaired it, they would have to pay the patent holder, or even worse, not be allowed to market their solution. Today, thousands of human genes have been patented, including those associated with Alzheimer's disease, colon cancer & asthma. The nightmare scenario is that the people who sequenced someone’s personal human genome get the patent on everyone’s. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-10_1245_patenting_dna.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-10_1245_patenting_dna.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, patenting DNA no Wed, 07 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The sorry state of liberty in America was exhibited by its easy submission to vaccine mandates which showed the stark divide between the authoritarian and liberty factions. Interestingly, the authoritarians included mainstream Republicans as well as all Democrats. It’s not that mandatory vaccinations are necessarily a bad thing but they should be judicially ascertained under Strict Scrutiny because they have a direct impact on liberty so can only be justified by meeting a specific important need: unless the job requires vaccination due to some real and immediate danger, liberty should win out: the forklift operator at a hospital better be doing heart transplants on the side if he must get the injections. Some countries, like Canada, New Zealand & China, don’t emphasize liberty like we do in America, and mandate even visitors to their country get vaxxed, and these restrictions are applauded by their populations. Tyranny of majority easily overwhelms liberty. Considering how overwhelmed libertyists were, it’s remarkable they were able to ultimately prevail against this momentum. Unfortunately, there’s still the public school system which is totally dominated by authoritarians, and at least 2 grade levels of kids who have COVID PTSD that they’ll never get over. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-08_1244_vaccine_mandates.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-08_1244_vaccine_mandates.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, COVID, mandates no Mon, 05 Dec 2022 06:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Socialism’s primary fault is that it assumes prescient elites can predict a future that’s best for everyone. This quickly devolves to authoritarianism by whoever is in political power at the moment. A good example is vaxx mandates for public employees. Luckily, the courts took the side of liberty but it only protected public employees. Unfortunately, private businesses were not subject to the court rulings and were able to fire tens of thousands of employees who would not yield their freedom to make choices for themselves. Private employers have carte blanche over their employees except in a few instances; for example, company communes were found to be unduly controlling, labor unions can’t be prohibited, and pregnant women can’t be forced to endanger their fetus. There are also safety regulations and discrimination issues but otherwise a company can be as petty & manipulative as it wants because private employees are hired “at will” so can be fired for any reason at any time. The Constitution protects us from government authoritarianism but it hasn’t been much help limiting government’s fascist cabal with business authoritarianism. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-08_1243_fascist_cabal.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-08_1243_fascist_cabal.mp3 2:08 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Sat, 03 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Forensic counting is a combination of auditing & investigating, and entails tracing funds, asset identification & recovery. The specialty was created to put Al Capone in Alcatraz but it has many uses in the world of business both legit & illegal. Uncovering fraud is forensic accounting’s most popular appeal; for example, Ponzi schemes such as Bernie Madoff’s. It’s also used less glamorously by insurance companies to establish damages from claims, and searching for hidden assets in divorce cases. Forensic accountants calculate economic damages from tort actions & breach of contract, post acquisition disputes such as earn-outs or breach of warranty, bankruptcy, reorganization, business evaluation, and in the computer age: e-discovery. There’s securities & tax fraud to find, and money laundering, of course. More esoteric pursuits include investigating construction claims, expropriations, product liability, trademark & patent infringement; even something as mundane as the breach of a nondisclosure or non-compete agreement. Forensic accounting has recently branched into psychology, incentive effects & behavioral characteristics, specifically defining the “fraud triangle,” which classifies the three elements of fraud as opportunity, need & rationalization. They use predictive factors like narcissism and adultery as common traits of fraud perpetrators. First there’s a suspect, usually a tip from disgruntled family member, government or criminal enterprise, then the forensic accountants are let loose. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-08_1242_forensic_accounting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-08_1242_forensic_accounting.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, forensic accounting no Thu, 01 Dec 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let’s review what’s happening in other countries: 1. It’s only a matter of time before there’s another U.S.-backed coup in Venezuela. 2. The tyranny in Canada has reached Soviet Union proportions. 3. Ukraine was partitioned and all the West could offer was hoaxes. 4. If Russia hadn’t have went first, Ukraine would have invaded itself. 5. Russia recovered from its oligarchs but it’s questionable if America will? 6. Russian sanctions were supposed to collapse Russia’s economy but it backfired. 7. Saudi Arabia somehow evades being designated a “terrorist State.” 8. The U.S. occupies Syria just like Russia occupies Ukraine. 9. How would conflicts start without False Flags? You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-06_1241_countries_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-06_1241_countries_concepts.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Syria, Ukraine, Cananda, Saudi Arabia no Tue, 29 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor A false flag is a horrific event covertly staged by one side but attributed to the other to justify some kind of intervention. There have been some famous false flags in American history: the sinking of the Maine that started the Spanish-American war, the Gulf of Tonkin incident that started the Vietnam war, and history has shined a light on dozens of other such events in the Middle East, Central America, and throughout the world. It’s possible that false flags are the primary impetus of many conflicts, and this makes sense. In most situations, one side is confident it will win, and the other is especially careful to keep that from happening, so why would they initiate a provocation? They wouldn’t which is why a false flag event is staged by the true aggressor. For example, how many times does the Poison Gas narrative get used but it’s always questionable where it came from, or even if there is any, and why does the U.S. care about that but not about drones blowing up weddings? The infamous “weapons of mass destruction” didn’t even require any action on Iraq’s part to start a false flag-induced war. After so much experience, you’d think Americans could recognize when they’re being manipulated, and they probably do but we’d rather have the facade of moral justification than simply display our naked power-mongering for what it is. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-06_1240_false_flags.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-06_1240_false_flags.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, false flags no Sun, 27 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor U.S. foreign policy is more hypocrisy than logic: at the same time as it condemns Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on territorial grounds, it does exactly the same thing in Syria. Currently, U.S. forces occupy about one-third of the country including most of its oil wealth, and has no intention of returning it. Syrian president Bashar al-Assad has pointed out incontestably that foreign troops are in Syria “without our invitation or consultation or permission.” Operating out of 10 bases in the east, the U.S. intends an indefinite military occupation, including its own soldiers plus an additional number of uncounted Special Operations personnel, as well as troops assigned to classified missions, and they’re establishing local governments to run the occupied territory’s affairs, using Kurdish fighters to handle policing. Bereft of its petroleum resources, and deprived of its best farmland, Syria is having difficulty but when they tried to recuperate a critical gas plant, they were repulsed by a U.S. airstrike. The Syrian government has stated invasion & occupation of eastern Syria is “a blatant interference, a flagrant violation of the UN Charter’s principles and an unjustified aggression on the sovereignty and independence of Syria.” If that sounds familiar, it should, just as Russia is unwelcome in Ukraine, the U.S. invasion and occupation of Syria is illegal, anti-democratic, plunderous, and should be opposed & ended. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-06_1239_syria_occupation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-06_1239_syria_occupation.mp3 2:45 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Syria, occupation no Fri, 25 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Saudi Arabia has only been a nation since 1932, and is the source of Wahhabism, the impetus behind jihadism. They were never held accountable in any way for being the country most responsible for orchestrating & financing 9-11. Why? Because the Saudis have the money to buy the best PR and Bush Jr., the American president at the time, considered the royal family his personal friends. 40% of Saudi Arabia’s inhabitants are migrants who can’t vote. Since 2015, the first time women could vote, there hasn’t been any more elections. Saudi Arabia borders Yemen. In 2014, an ethnic faction, the Houthis, deposed the president. Saudi Arabia got involved even though the conflict was internal to Yemen, and began an air campaign & naval blockade, contributing 100 warplanes and 150,000 soldiers to a war which killed over 130,000 people. In a show of allegiance, the U.S. designated the Houthis as a “foreign terrorist organization.” This led to Yemen being termed a "humanitarian catastrophe" by Amnesty International. Even with all of this, the Saudi forces were roundly defeated, even including the destruction of 4 Abrams tanks and the abandonment of more, after which in 2022, the Saudis withdrew. Saudi Arabia has recently reaffirmed its commitment to Russia despite the Ukrainian invasion. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-06_1238_saudi_arabia.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-06_1238_saudi_arabia.mp3 2:42 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Saudi Arabia no Wed, 23 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Russia is Europe’s energy supplier. In a vain & misconceived attempt to punish Russia for invading Ukraine, the EU decided to sanction it economically. In their hubris, they thought the weak Russian economy would crumble in a couple months, and even serve to bring down Vladimir Putin. But rather than that happening, instead the EU itself began suffering the ramifications, especially in the energy sector: no Russian natural gas, no Russian oil & no fertilizer from Belarus, the world’s largest producer. Germany was particularly impacted, losing the source of 80% of their fossil fuel energy. When Europe finally decided to allow this vital resource, Russia required they pay in rubles because the sanctions wouldn’t allow payment in any other currency, essentially giving away the products for free. The outraged Europeans hypocritically claimed the Russians were engaging in economic warfare. If that wasn’t delusional enough, they continued to predict Russian’s capitulation due to the economic warfare against them. The fact is, Russia was totally ready for the Ukrainian invasion, having prepared since 2014 when the duly-elected Russian-friendly president was toppled, instigated by the U.S. In reality, Russia was made a much more dangerous enemy with sanctions: they have no more to lose economically, their people coalesce around the adversity, and they became self-sufficient & immune to Western pressure. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-04_1237_russian_sanctions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-04_1237_russian_sanctions.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Russian sanctions no Mon, 21 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor For 4 decades, the Soviet Union was America’s main rival, so when it collapsed in 1990, rather than help them recover economically like they did for Europe after WW2, the U.N. proposed a plan to give an equal share of Russia’s net worth to everybody who lived there. Sounds egalitarian but practically starving people sold their share to whoever was buying, and organized crime were the only survivors of the collapse: that’s where the oligarchs came from. Afterwards, Russia was much worse off than it was under Communism so a democratically elected strongman like Putin, who promised to reign in the oligarchs, came into power. International relations settled and the world seemed like it was going to be a somewhat peaceful place for awhile. However, Russia never really lost its bogeyman status, and when candidate Trump stated his intention to normalize relations with them, the Deep State went into full panic, even casting president Trump as a Russian agent with completely phony evidence that was promoted by the MSM, DOJ & Democrat-controlled investigations, so-much-so that the majority of Democrats today don’t know that it was all a hoax. Russia went from being America’s erstwhile friend to the New World Order’s most-hated enemy. This was obviously intentional because Russia was not succumbing to the new social order of Wokeness, and everything that goes along with it, not the least of which is the West’s own rising oligarchs. What is truly ironic is that Russia in now more of a defender of traditional American values than America is. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-04_1236_russia.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-04_1236_russia.mp3 2:47 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Russia, oligarchs no Sat, 19 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The West’s media coverage of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was hoaxes from beginning to end. It started with the Snake Island soldiers fighting to the death - not; a beautiful Amazon fighter pic which is a fashion model holding an Airsoft; The “Ghost of Kyiv” fighter Ace was fictional; and the young girl’s note is from 2017 in Israel. The fact that American media repeated all of these hoaxes gleefully without question means we’ve learned nothing from Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan & a list of other contrived conflicts. The people who propagate these lies sound stupid, their arguments are stupid, and their outrage is stupid. A voters map of Ukraine shows the reality of public opinion: eastern Ukraine is Russian-speaking Russian ex-pats who were being discriminated against by the Ukrainian government in the East. The obvious solution would have been for Ukraine to negotiate with the separatists, ending up with a West Ukraine and an East Ukraine but closer to each other than the East becoming part of Russia. In fact, Ukraine had negotiated that kind of deal early in the war but NATO wants Russia weakened so that it can be forced into the Globalist world order, so bribed Ukraine to continue the conflict. The fact is, the West, specifically the United States operating through its NATO catspaw, caused Russia to invade Ukraine, and rather than surrender for the sake of everyday Ukrainians, instead insisted on fighting to the bitter end, thereby losing all the most important parts of the country: the wheat harvest, the natural gas fields, the industrial heartland & the seaports, leaving nothing but the hoaxes. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-04_1235_ukraine_hoaxes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-04_1235_ukraine_hoaxes.mp3 2:52 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Ukraine, hoaxes, invasion no Thu, 17 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The U.S. predicted Russia would invade Ukraine but the reason they knew was never explained. Imagine Mexico's democratically-elected president wanted closer ties with America but a Russian-backed faction overthrew him and tried to form closer ties with Russia: how would America respond? Well, that’s how Russia responded in the opposite circumstances. Ukraine’s Russian-sympathizing western provinces didn’t like the coup & tried to break-away. Since 2014 they had been getting shelled daily by Nazi-sympathizing Ukraine forces; over 6 million refugees had already fled the area. In February 2022, the Ukrainian military was massing on the border of the region and was imminently going to go on the offensive against what they considered a rebellion so Russia invaded first to protect what they considered their people, which is opposite the false narrative that the Ukrainians were simply responding to Russian troop movements. Then, as Russian forces occupied a city, militia battalions of technically Ukrainian-nationality but Russian-patriots would quickly assemble and continue the march west. Russia actually became more powerful as the war dragged on. There was simply no hope for Ukraine, and the time for a ceasefire passed. Worse, the extremely biased, censored and completely propagandized war reporting has not relayed any of these stark facts to the world at large. If only words were as effective as artillery? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-04_1234_ukraine_invasion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-10-04_1234_ukraine_invasion.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Ukraine, Russian invasion no Tue, 15 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor It’s easy to see that Canada is where America is going, politics-wise, economic-wise & else-wise: a cynical dictatorship that relies on the tyranny of democracy to crush liberty. For example, their Bill C-25 imposes “diversity” on all corporations with financial penalties for those that don’t comply, including teams of “inspectors” to surveil them from within. Like the old Soviet Union, they encourage internal spying to report equity, speech & inclusion violations. Paralegal bodies known as “Human Rights Tribunals” are the judges with the power to shut down business, impose prison time, and compel “re-education” of offenders. There’s also Bill S-202 which amends the Criminal Code to outlaw “Conversion Therapy,” criminalizing parents, lawyers, physicians & church leaders who object to state-compelled hormone-drugging & genital mutilation procedures. There’s more: Bill C-76 imposes restrictions on third-party speech during extended election periods, and there’s a proposal requiring all news creators to procure a license for approved content. Canada has no term limit on the office of prime minister so Justin Trudeau may be in power for years to come. The only opposition, The People’s Party of Canada, was wiped out at the polls. How did this happen to our once freedom-loving northern neighbor? Democracy happened: Canada has an even higher plurality of feminists, minorities & weirdos than the U.S., and their media is even more censored; plus emigration from the U.S. by people with the worst of those attributes. However, the bright spot is that Climate Change will be awesome for Canada. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-27_1233_canada_tyranny.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-27_1233_canada_tyranny.mp3 3:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Canada, tyranny no Sun, 13 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor There's a Leftist narrative that Venezuela's problems are all caused by the U.S., and there’s some truth to that even though socialism could do the job by itself. In 2020, the U.S. was even accused of plotting a coup against the Maduro government when speedboats carrying 50 mercenaries, some of which were American, were intercepted by the Venezuelan military. Though the U.S. denies it, USAID allocated $42 million to support the competing political party, another $20 million to a “democratic transition” fund, and an addition $2 million in bribes to set up opposition negotiations with the government. The U.S. also placed a $15 million bounty on Maduro, accusing him of narcoterrorism. Russia, for its part, has 400 mercenaries of its own in Venezuela, and there are hundreds of Cuban intelligence officers supporting the government. All of this espionage and intrigue from the major powers for a small country in South America may seem silly until considering the fact that Venezuela’s proven oil reserves are the largest in the world. Though Capitalists would like Venezuela to have a leader more aligned with their interests, the citizens of Venezuela support their government to take care of their needs first, even if it is incompetent & corrupt. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-27_1232_venezuela.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-27_1232_venezuela.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Venezuela no Fri, 11 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let’s review which foreign affairs are happening today: 1. A multipolar world will provide a much needed adversarial relationship. 2. Only Muslims can stop jihadism. 3. China will not collapse quietly. 4. If there’s a best country, you should move there. 5. Afghanistan fell because the young Afghani men were expected to fight for feminism. 6. Today’s energy shortages are intentional towards the goal of changing the world. 7. Six million is as good a number as any because any is too much. 8. The U.S.S. Liberty attack by Israel should be taught in schools alongside Zionism. 9. State-sponsored terrorism is only applicable to other nations. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-27_1231_foreign_affairs_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-27_1231_foreign_affairs_concepts.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, foreign affairs no Wed, 09 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor According to government experts, states can sponsor terrorist groups in several ways, including but not limited to: funding terrorist organizations, providing training, supplying weapons, providing other logistical & intelligence assistance, and hosting groups within their borders. This definition easily describes the United States’ current relationship in Ukraine & Syria, and in the past with Cuba and a host of others before that. Hypocrisy aside, Iran has been deemed to provide state-sponsored terrorism, and now the U.S. also suggests Russia should be labeled as such. Apparently, any nation that engages in covert or overt operations for their own best interests are sponsoring terrorism, except America of course. What’s ironic is that most acts of what normal people consider terrorism, like the 9/11 attacks that changed the world, even though they were financed and planned by Saudi Arabia, it was not considered the sponsoring state. Instead, Iraq & Afghanistan were the nations chosen for that label, neither of which had anything to do with it, and Obama Bin Laden was assassinated while being protected by the Pakistan military. “Terrorism” is one of those words that carry a visceral meaning that people are repelled by, and anyone or any place designated as one are reviled and can be unquestioningly dealt with. That’s what has prompted the overuse of the term to the point of irrelevance, even if it really is state-sponsored. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-25_1230_state-sponsored_terrorism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-25_1230_state-sponsored_terrorism.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, terrorism, state-sponsored terrorism no Mon, 07 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Using today’s standards of censorship, obfuscation, and outright misinformation, it’s difficult to tell if history is true, but knowing that the winners write the history, and that narratives must be maintained at all cost, sometimes allows you to discern the truth for yourself. One of the most provocative myths is the Jewish conquest of Palestine, turning it into Israel. It seems any straying from the “facts” leads to being called a “Holocaust denier,” and persecution by the Jewish Defense League. One such story could aptly be called “Liberty denier.” Israel initiated the 1967 War with its Arab neighbors for their own nationalistic reasons. To insure their sneak attack would remain secret, the Israeli air force tried to sink a U.S. navy spy ship in the Mediterranean, the U.S.S. Liberty, that could have given the alarm since the Americans weren’t on-board with the invasion. The first wave of planes tried to take out the ship’s communications and was mostly successful, destroying all but 1 of the antennas, but that was enough for the Liberty to send out a distress call. Therefore, to complete the cover-up, the ship was attacked with the intention of sinking it. Israel's influence on the U.S. was so total that when a U.S. aircraft carrier that heard the SOS went to save the Liberty, the president of Israel called the U.S. president, Lyndon Johnson, and asked him to order back the carrier: amazingly, he did. Luckily, the captain of the ship ignored the order and saved the Liberty so we have the story today. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-25_1229_uss_liberty_attack.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-25_1229_uss_liberty_attack.mp3 2:47 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, U.S.S. Liberty, Israel no Sat, 05 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Without reservation, people accept there were 6 million Jews killed by the Nazis: why wouldn't they? They were taught that as a child, and teachers only teach things that are true, don't they? As far as "The Holocaust" goes, there's a ton of seeming fabrication used for political motives, mostly as a lever to establish Israel. Congratulations, it worked, and the propaganda was admirably done. However, where did that number come from? The concentration camps only accounted for a small fraction. For example, something over 50,000 prisoners total died at Buchenwald, the largest concentration camp, most from exhaustion, starvation & disease, only a fraction of which were Jewish. Even if multiplying that number by the number of camps, it’s be far short of even a million of anybody, let alone Jews. Turns out, the 6 million is derived from the census of how many Jews there were in Germany before the war vs. the census after the war: 6 million Jews lived in Germany in 1933; none afterwards, as if a post-war Jew would admit they were on a public census. Tenuous proof indeed but justifiable. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-23_1228_6_million_jews.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-23_1228_6_million_jews.mp3 2:10 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, the Holocaust no Thu, 03 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There’s a world energy shortage and its intentional. Climate alarmists want to reduce energy consumption by reducing the supply. They have been brainwashed to prefer the promise of an ecotopia fantasy over continuing progress. They want to limit consumption of oil, natural gas, and even water. If it takes an economic collapse, and dramatic fall in the standard of living to do it, even the cost of millions of human lives, that’s just the price everyone in the world has to pay. They don’t consider that large groups of people don’t share their metaphysical values & beliefs, but remain smug in their hubris and cocoons of imagined virtue. The State religion of environmentalism has convinced generations of youth to consider carbon emissions an existential threat which must be reduced for the good of everybody. Little do they know that their paternalistic efforts will instead result in violence, probably even invasion, from those they oppress through suppression of their energy supplies. Populations that used to have no inclination to go to war, scoffing at the very idea, will mobilize when their children are freezing and there’s little to eat. The honest fact is, there is no world energy shortage, there’s only deluded & self-loathing people who want one, many of which won’t be affected by it because they’re part of the elite. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-23_1227_world_energy_shortage.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-23_1227_world_energy_shortage.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, climate alarmism, energy shortage no Tue, 01 Nov 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Why any modern country would want to involve itself in nation-building smacks of condescending hubris, but both Russia and the U.S. gave it a try in Afghanistan, both to ignominious failure. It was unclear why the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, and frustratingly incomprehensible to most people why it remained there for two decades? A reason that matches the facts better than any other explanation: it was to spread feminism. Behind the scenes, the West focused on "save the girls:" educated them into strong, independent women who don’t need no man, and that’s why a quarter-million man U.S.-trained & equipped Afghan military folded in the time it took the Taliban to drive across the country. The most important thing to men is sex which is why the Afghani forces capitulated to easily. While the West had occupied Afghanistan, they protected women, and during that time Afghani men had become Incels, involuntarily celibate, just like in the West where 30% of under-30 men are virgins. The Taliban offered a wife to every Iraqi soldier who would join their side and they all did. For the same reason armies of young men have always invaded mud-brick villages & impoverished cities, it isn't about gold, it's for the pussy. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-21_1226_failure_in_afghanistan.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-21_1226_failure_in_afghanistan.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Afghanistan, feminism no Sun, 30 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor A woman who had heard about my world travels asked me which was the best country to retire in, but when I said the U.S., she was incredulous. I asked if she’d ever lived anywhere else: she hadn’t. I told her Americans take the fruits of White Supremacy for granted: they just expect other people to be conscientious, honest, industrious & courteous, but that’s the exception, and why the West is exceptional. Many Americans condemn the Patriarchy yet they would most certainly be appalled if they had to live in countries without it. Americans value punctuality; they expect a good faith estimate, professional decorum, high standards & quality workmanship. They feel secure in their person because they can depend on others being law-abiding. That eliminates most of the world unless they retire to walled expat compounds. If you value your personal independence, specifically liberty, there’s no place else on earth that enshrines that concept in their constitution like the United States. There are lots & lots of socialist-leaning, even Marxist, people who would think some other country would be better to live in than the U.S. The solution is obvious but instead those people insist on changing America rather than moving. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-21_1225_best_country.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-21_1225_best_country.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, patriarchy, white supremacy, no Fri, 28 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It’s predicted that the world’s next big economic crisis will be China. Their debt is almost four times their gross domestic product, three times more than the equivalent U.S. debt. Their housing sector accounts for a third of their GDP, twice the U.S., and people have quit paying mortgages on houses that haven’t even been built yet. 40% of Chinese real estate investment companies are facing bankruptcy forcing banks to close, and signaling possible bank runs. The government of China is literally driving out foreign companies, even foreign individuals. The once touted centrally-controlled economy is imploding: there really is no compromise between Marxism & Capitalism. But China isn’t going to go down quietly: they’re actually calling the downturn the “New Cultural Revolution.” There are daily Emergency Alert messages on everyone’s phone accusing the West of orchestrating their problems and calling for rearming. Military training is mandatory in schools. They are belligerent to Taiwan and India, and are joining forces with Russia for another Cold War. China’s totalitarian president Xi, like Mao & Stalin before him, are true believers, so if worse comes to worse, they’re going to need a scapegoat, which is why they’ve been prepped, specifically against the U.S. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-19_1224_china_collapsing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-19_1224_china_collapsing.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, China collapse no Wed, 26 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world and it’s estimated that perhaps a half-percent of them are jihadists: in American eyes, that’s 8 million potential terrorists, way more than the amount of Transgenders yet we’re changing our entire social & legal system to accommodate their predilections. No wonder so many Americans are Islamophobic, especially when there are so few positive role models of them in media or in real life. It’s interesting that white Western women are most accepting of mass immigration because Islamic culture is so antithetical to feminism, yet there is cause for such fear. Most people are secretly resentful & perverse, and cheer inwardly when their team makes a big play: 9-11 was a win in the Muslim world; plus the ingredients for extremism are embedded in the Koran. Even if only a quarter of Muslims have hidden sympathies for jihadism, that’s 4 billion people so we have to treat the situation as if they all do. Nazi Germany only had 18 million soldiers total, and only a couple million at the beginning of WW2. With the right circumstances & coaxing, Islam would be on the other side in WW3, and frankly, they’re more committed than us. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-27_1223_islamophobia.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-27_1223_islamophobia.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Islamophobia no Mon, 24 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Since the fall of the Soviet Union three decades ago, the world has been dominated by the West, specifically the United States. It was a unipolar world trending in the direction of globalism. Unfortunately, an adversarial relationship is always required to prevent monopoly and all the problems that come with it. Globalism was a de facto monopoly but it served liberty well until the levers of central power were gradually usurped by socialists, both Communists that represent control by state interests, and Fascists like the World Economic Forum who represent the so-called “stakeholders,” meaning rich private interests. Liberty was slowing being strangled out as these groups inexorably became stronger & stronger via their monopoly powers. That all changed with the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the West’s sanctions against it. Several powerful nations had resented the U.S.’s overarching control of all modernity, primarily through military, internet & the banking system, but the cost & impetus to compete with the established framework was too high. However, they had no choice due to sanctions so they took the opportunity that had been in preparation for so long, and combined into a competing world order known as BRICS: Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, but is expanding to include Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Argentina & Iran. At first glance, this formidable competition might seem threatening to American hegemony, but if viewed from the perspective of the benefits gained by having market options, a multipolar world is a good thing. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-17_1222_multipolar_world.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-17_1222_multipolar_world.mp3 3:01 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, unipolar world, multipolar world no Sat, 22 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review what’s happened so far during the revolution: 1. “Insurrection” has been redefined to mean a pushback against what feminists, minorities & weirdos want. 2. The goal of any revolution is to obtain power by the revolutionaries. 3. The list of who’s behind the revolution is long, all with grievance in common. 4. The Matriarchy revolution is self-financed. 5. The U.S. can only stay together if control is again vested in the states as specified in the Constitution. 6. You know the enemy by how they spell “freedumb.” 7. WW3 is happening in the home. 8. What can you do to foment revolution? 9. 5th Columners are enemies who pretend to be on your side. 10. Everyone who’s not a Leftist is being defined a “domestic terrorist.” You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-17_1221_revolution_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-17_1221_revolution_concepts.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, revolution no Thu, 20 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The definition of “terrorism” has been contorted. As of 2021, the Department of Homeland Security considers white supremacists as the top domestic terrorist threat, at the same level as ISIS, explaining that far-right terrorism is motivated by nationalism and anti-government patriot beliefs. Essentially, patriotism is now terrorism. Bizarrely, “fiery but peaceful” Antifa is not on the list, but concerned parents at local school board meetings trying to keep Critical Race Theory out of the classrooms were considered “domestic terrorists.” The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act has proposed legislation that would create offices within the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and the FBI to combat far-right violence, though there’s no mention of far-left violence. Apparently, holding traditional American values, the ones currently being denigrated in schools and state as racism, is now terrorism. It’s probable that soon MAGA “extremists” will be labeled as domestic terrorists. There are already calls for the internment of Republicans, and the execution of President Trump. Now that does sound a lot like domestic terrorism. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-17_1220_domestic_terrorist.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-17_1220_domestic_terrorist.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, domestic terrorist no Tue, 18 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor 5th Columners are enemies pretending to be friends; secret opposition sympathizers who undermine an ideological group from within. The term comes from real-life examples in war but it has been adopted virtually online. These people join forums on social media under the pretense of sharing common values, ostensibly posting in good faith, but are actually disingenuous to the point of obfuscating the issue entirely, intentionally so. They are most successful at disassembling the group’s objective, clarity & cohesiveness. One type of 5th Column is "glowies,” federal agents instigating false flag operations via dupes, but it’s much larger than that. How many of the people who act irrational, mentally ill even, are pretending to be on a side simply to distract others who are sincere from discussing issues salient to the group’s intention? It seems to be a tactic primarily used against the Right who feel compelled to allow Free Speech whereas the Left will efficiently censor such attempts. It doesn’t take long for a Right-leaning forum to succumb to 5th Column infiltration, causing cynicism and disintegration of any common goal. What makes it so insidious is that it’s the government sponsoring it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-15_1219_5th_columners.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-15_1219_5th_columners.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, 5th Column, glowies no Sun, 16 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The division between the two factions in the United States, traditional Americans vs. the egalitarians, has become frightening. All the values we once had in common are now completely opposing, and it’s common practice to call traditionalists names & openly vilify them, and try subjugate them. To even support MAGA, the idea that America used to be a better place to live, causes suspicion, fear and contempt. The reason for the vituperation is obvious: demonizing the enemy is the first step to destroying them. The question is, what can you do stop it, or at least slow it down? What can you do to foment revolution? The strategy is simple passive aggressiveness; be nonpassive in passive ways, and it only requires fortitude on your part. For example, during mandates, masking or lockdowns: don’t. Don’t use forced pronouns; claim that Biden was fraudulently elected; and Antifa uses terrorism. Insist that the media outright lies, that censorship is a big problem, and point out any other examples of the book “1984” happening today. The boldness of your defiance squelches the subjugators and encourages the resistance. If you get Canceled, take it as an honor. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-15_1218_fomenting_revolution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-15_1218_fomenting_revolution.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, revolution no Fri, 14 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor WW3 is going on right now: it’s worldwide, it’s for complete dominance, it’s depopulating, and it’s happening inside every society. The combatants are women vs. men. The weapon of women is democracy and the weapon of men is testosterone. The results so far is that 30% of men under 30 are virgins and half of all men haven’t had sexual relations in the past year, marriage is at an all time low, as is childbirth, and educated women instigate 9 out of 10 divorces. Obviously, women are winning and have been for decades, mostly because men still haven’t started fighting back because they haven’t yet been radicalized like women have been. Radicalization is good because it defines the sides: no more complacency & wishful thinking. If only one side is radicalized then it wins without a battle due to lack of battle lines. Hopefully, concepts like MGTOW, Men Going Their Own Way, and Red Pill, the realization that society is gynocentric and actively works against men, continue to gain steam. Fortunately, even if we are outnumbered and far behind, our side can still win because we’re all individual strategists who can work alone behind enemy lines. Unfortunately, that in many cases turns out to be our own homes. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-13_1217_ww3_at_home.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-13_1217_ww3_at_home.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, WW3, feminism no Wed, 12 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Freedom Convoy was Canadian truckers’ attempt to squelch the vaxx mandates. The truckers initially said that was their goal but it wasn’t popular, Canadians overwhelmingly want mandates, so the truckers strategically branded it “freedom” which had broader appeal. and was somewhat successful. But pushback from the elites & media was intense. The CBC said Russia was behind the convoy, and called for “boots on the grounds, guns on the hip.” The police attacked the completely peaceful protesters at night with tear gas & rubber bullets. When that didn’t work, they rode over the crowd with horses, even trampling some. “Freedumb,” spelled d, u, m, b, became the operative pejorative from the establishment, and it was smeared everywhere. What better example proving that it’s freedom itself that these people want extinguished. America tried its own trucker convoy: it was much larger than the Canadian one but was totally blacked out by the mainstream media. It didn’t seem possible the government could get away with that level of suppression but there’s a lot of people out there with their hands over their eyes & ears. Then, too coincidentally, Russia invaded Ukraine on the same day the convoy were entering Washington, D.C., completely neutralizing it. The most important accomplishment of the Freedom Convoy was to show all the people on the verge of resisting that they’re not alone. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-13_1216_freedom_convoy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-13_1216_freedom_convoy.mp3 2:33 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, freedom convoy, Canadian truckers no Mon, 10 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Social media has allowed groups of people to coalesce en masse so that now even the most fringe opinions have a large impact on the political scene. .01% of 330 million people can still seem like everyone so if that number was 1% or 10%, that’s a cohort that rivals the population size of many nations. If those people are politically active while everyone else remains docile, they’re going to be in control, especially in cities where it only takes small numbers to be a majority. Trying to pushback in such situations hasn’t gotten any better; if anything, it’s worse because they have achieved critical mass. America’s only hope is to do as the Constitution originally intended and send power back to the states rather than an all-powerful federal government controlled by special interests. For example, states recently got back the ability to determine their own abortion laws. States also need to dominate the large corporations as Florida did to Disney, and States must take control of education away from the teacher’s unions. There could still be a United States but federal power would need to be significantly weakened so that feminists, minorities & weirdos couldn’t dictate from D.C. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-11_1215_winning_at_the_state_level.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-11_1215_winning_at_the_state_level.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, federalism, abortion, state's rights no Sat, 08 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Leftist takeover of the U.S. was not accidental: it was great strategy, planning & organization. The biggest question is: where did they get all the money to do it? Some say China, and billionaire elites also get a lot of the blame, but the real answer is that they don’t need much money. Feminists, minorities & weirdos, FMWs, that believe in the cause will do it for free. There are millions of FMWs everywhere holding strategic levers of power all the way up & down the command structure. They make what they want happen, and what they don’t want, not happen; they even control all the oversight so there is no checks & balances. Democracy is their most powerful weapon but the judiciary is their ace in the hole. For example, say a voter fraud case comes up: if it's an FMW judge who gets it, they just throw it out, and if it gets past the first court, they squelch it at a higher one. Places like Washington D.C. are totally compromised: guilty people get let off and innocent people are imprisoned depending on their politics. The most massive display of their power was the fraudulent election of Biden. As demonstrated in the documentary movie “2000 Mules,” unlimited money, man-power & organization passed through multiple levels of oversight both before and during the election, and the clamps are even tighter now after the subterfuge has been exposed. That takes tremendous infiltration: every committee, every elected official, every judge in the path. Apparently, there wasn’t a single person with the ability to stop it and would have at any stage of the process. It’s breathtaking in its completeness, and the FMWs all help pay for it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-11_1214_whos_paying_for_it.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-11_1214_whos_paying_for_it.mp3 3:01 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Leftism, election fraud, FMW no Thu, 06 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Who is it that is taking over society, demonizing existing precepts, and destroying what used to be considered American values? What group is so prevalent that they are in control of everything? It’s a coalition of those that feel inferior, intimidated & left out by the status quo, primarily feminists, minorities & weirdos; there’s also young people who always tend towards whatever is opposite their elder’s sensibilities & goals; and there’s the environmentalists that want the world to stop; there’s NeoCons who believe might makes right and not taking the opportunity to dominate & subjugate is an opportunity lost; there’s the brainwashed who have no power of critical thinking themselves so imbibe whatever the mainstream media is shilling; and there’s foreign governments who are simply acting in the best interests of their own country. However, the most insidious are the people who simply want to “burn it all down.” How is it that these groups are winning so completely? Because they control the narrative. Why can’t normal people simply ignore them? Because democracy favors them: there are many more losers than winners in a merit-based society; and at the top of every organization are their supporters who would fire or arrest anyone pushing back. They're fighting harder now because men have finally caught on but the feminists, minorities & weirdos haven't lost any ground yet: all those who were in power are still in power, censorship is worse than ever, authoritarianism remains high, and the coming economic difficulty & shortages will only make them stronger because fear favors the despicable. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-09_1213_who_is_it.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-09_1213_who_is_it.mp3 3:04 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, feminists, minorities, weirdos, control no Tue, 04 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There’s an all-out war on the tenets of liberalism in this Information Age: tearing down custom, culture & traditions; attacking liberty & freedom of speech, and canceling of the national identity; it’s truly WW3. Like all wars, it’s the result of long-simmering resentments, wanting to settle old scores, vengeance, and an effort to seize power & control. Their slogan is, “It’s our turn now.” The goal is clear, they mention it all the time: it’s to usurp the privilege that white males possess as a result of whiteness & maleness. That can only be accomplished by condemning those traits, holding them back, discriminating against them in business, government & law, because otherwise men would easily win based on merit. There are also people who through fear, perversity or masochism, want there to be fewer humans consuming less things, and a cap on progress. To subjugate the populations of the world, they create existential threats like climate alarmism, an improbable catastrophe of some sort, or a foreign military invasion, to force their agenda of deconstruction, depopulation & deindustrialization, primarily by the means of reducing the supply of energy. They literally want you dead. It sounds crazy because these people are crazy: over half are diagnosed and take psych meds, and another large portion should be. They aren’t capable of running their own lives and they don’t want you to run yours either. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-09_1212_whats_the_goal.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-09_1212_whats_the_goal.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, WW3, white male privilege no Sun, 02 Oct 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The U.S. has suffered a weaponization of the legal system, the FBI in particular; from the enduring Russian Collusion Hoax to the obviously fabricated January 6th insurrection narrative with its prime time hearings and complete kangaroo court atmosphere. Many pundits are observing that whatever false accusations against the Right that the Left makes are likely to be what the Left is actually doing so if they are claiming insurrection by their opponents then that’s what they plan themselves. The “fiery but peaceful” riots that killed dozens and destroyed hundreds of millions of dollars of private property are ignored yet January sixth, whose only true casualty was an unarmed woman shot by Capital police, is the focus of attention. Perpetrators of heinous acts during the riots were rarely identified, let alone held responsible, yet January 6th protesters were relentlessly tracked down and held in prison without bail for years. Retired generals say if Republicans take control of congress, there will be an insurrection. It’s the height of fear-mongering & perverse extortion. There will certainly be an insurrection if the Left loses power because, apparently, an “insurrection” is them not being in control. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-07_1211_insurrection.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-07_1211_insurrection.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, insurrection, January 6th no Fri, 30 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review what’s happening during the collapse & virtual civil war: 1. The End of the World isn’t going to be as bad as it sounds. 2. You’re actually prepping for people who want your supplies more than you. 3. What if a crash happens and nobody notices? 4. If there’s a collapse, the National Guard gots this. 5. Any threat to the food supply is intentional. 6. When Communist revolutions are fomenting, all that prevents them is helicopters. 7. The Matriarchy revolution doesn’t need a leader because it’s organic. 8. There’s no winning strategy for the Patriarchy to defend against the Matriarchy. 9. One side is going to have to completely win the next civil war. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-07_1210_collapse__virtual_civil_war_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-07_1210_collapse__virtual_civil_war_concepts.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, collapse, virtual civil war, civil war no Wed, 28 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It seems likely the United States will endure a second civil war; in fact, it’s underway right now, a virtual civil war where the two sides don’t share enough values to agree on anything nor even have the ability to communicate. The Patriarchy, so-called “White culture,” is a result of the Enlightenment that occurred in seventeenth century Europe, and subsequently adopted by the fledgling United States, when liberal tenets like innocent until proven guilty, children are not responsible for the actions of their parents, equal protection under the law & Rule of Law were developed. This was a time of Protestant Work Ethic and supposed meritocracy, when people advanced their station in life more through their own actions rather than inheritance. Personal autonomy, the concept of people making decisions for themselves, was also an important ingredient. Now a large portion of the population have denounced Enlightenment values, and have adopted the opposite: Believe Women without evidence, Whites are responsible for the deeds of their ancestors, legal persecution to destroy their enemy, and giving preferential treatment for birth traits. Working is discouraged by proposing a Universal Basic Income. Obviously, with antithetical positions like these, there is no compromising: one side must lose completely and have values forced upon them just as in the first civil war. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-07_1209_whats_after_the_next_civil_war.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-07_1209_whats_after_the_next_civil_war.mp3 2:33 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, civil war, enlightenment no Mon, 26 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Not just the United States, the whole world is currently in a virtual civil war: not with other nations, though it may turn into World War 3 in real life, but instead ideological conflict between people within their own nations. The two sides are the Patriarchy and the Matriarchy, which makes drawing battle-lines impossible because they’re in the households and bedrooms of families. Men are evolved not to fight with women, so the Patriarchy has no winning strategy, only capitulation, which is what has been happening for the past few decades until now we’re at a tipping point, maybe even over it. Authoritarianism is dominant because old men won’t step up because they want to rest on their laurels, living in an effort-free wonderland contemplating retirement, selfishly defending their personal interests, and accept tyranny to keep their idyllic life-style intact: they even condemn those who do act. The only glimmer of hope is that the older generation will eventually die off, and the younger generations that did have families in this anti-family environment are on the Patriarchy’s side. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-05_1208_no_winning_strategy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-05_1208_no_winning_strategy.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, virtual civil war, patriarchy, matriarchy no Sat, 24 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Patriarchy is surely losing to the Matriarchy but anyone who says so is called a conspiracy theorist, claiming that there’s no organized battle, and never admitting the sublime effort going on everywhere behind the scenes. Over the past few decades, FMWs, feminists, minorities & weirdos got into strategic positions in business & society via Affirmative Action, preferential hiring & “diversity,” and then social media came along which enabled them to coalesce in the background. They’re also very cynical, a side-effect of their special treatment, knowing they didn’t achieve their positions through merit, so they have more allegiance to what got them there than they are to their place of employment, their country, or even their families. FMWs don’t have a central authority: not the Democrat party, not the media, not the court system nor schools, but they control all of those things like cells in a clandestine revolution, each working independently of each other but all recognizing what's happening and pushing towards their goal. It’s an organic conspiracy, a good example of emergent order. The fact that no one is pushing back supports this conclusion because men are accustomed to being subservient to women at home and in society at large. The “privilege” that the Matriarchy claim men have is only one of projection; it’s they who really have most of the privileges, and now they want them all. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-05_1207_organic_conspiracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-05_1207_organic_conspiracy.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, conspiracy no Thu, 22 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The specter of tossing hooded Communists out of helicopters into the sea is an enduring one. First practiced by France during the Malagasy Uprising, then the “Dirty War” in Argentina, and the Bougainville Civil War in Papua New Guinea. But “death flights” really entered the public consciousness as a staple of the Chilean regime of Augusto Pinochet. Helicopters have been associated with dictators ever since. What’s most notable is that it appears to have been effective. In most cases, Communist take-overs are successful because their most fervent supporters are fully committed to the ideology, and there is an immense army of the disaffected who will join the ranks given the chance. Sometimes the takeovers involve violence but in the modern era, democracy is enough: egalitarians always eventually get a voting majority because the allure of “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need,” causes the majority of people to immediately improve their lives even though it’s a totally bankrupt concept in the long run. With that kind of support working against free enterprise, it’s remarkable the U.S. hadn’t turned Communist before. In fact, it was close a couple times but greed won out over resentment. However, the threat of socialism is stronger now: Marxism or Fascism seems to be the world’s future. There are people, mostly Republicans, who still think America can be recovered, but democracy is the culprit not the solution: helicopters is seemingly all that works. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-03_1206_helicopters.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-03_1206_helicopters.mp3 2:42 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, communists, death flights, helicopters no Tue, 20 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It’s impossible to know exactly when The Collapse will occur but a decreasing selection of competing products will be the first sign that there's a problem, along with a complete lack of the more exotic ones or specialty items. Interstate transportation will be disrupted: a solo truckdriver going cross country won't be possible, trucks will need to travel in armed convoys, and if law & order cannot be established along the entire route then even that won't be possible. Luckily, many people have already shifted to eating locally grown food but growing things takes time and several seasons to increase the supply of fresh food enough to match the demand. Fresh meat will become especially expensive because it will be in such short supply which the people who caused The Collapse will revel in. There will be plenty of something to eat: dried & canned goods, probably even canned meats. In reality, unless there’s a complete breakdown, which seems highly unlikely, there will be plenty of food of some kind or another at a reasonable price. The old Soviet Union is a good example of a Marxist supply chain: the people didn’t go hungry, they just had to wait for hours in line to buy a small selection of items. Unless the people who caused The Collapse get full control, it won’t be that bad. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-03_1205_food_supply.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-03_1205_food_supply.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, food supply, collapse no Sun, 18 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Rather than civil war caused by differing ideologies, it's more likely the U.S. will collapse due to economics. People have been predicting this will occur for decades now, and the hysteria has really built up since the Lockdown, so it’s fun to speculate what will happen when it does. By looking around the neighborhood and knowing that many of the houses you see have guns, it’s likely the first thing people would do is form little local militias. That will pretty much insure safety in rural areas and the suburbs: families being protected by their family members and neighbors. However, the National Guard will need to be called out for the cities. It will take a while for citizen-soldiers to muster, be equipped and given orders, but within the first month, they’ll be the ones taking over from the militias to protect neighborhoods, mostly from people fleeing the cities, and it will be them that sets up temporary camps for the refugees. The National Guard protects other families like they want their own families to be protected so things will soon become calm & secure, and life will slowly return to normal. After 6 months, the DHS will take over management of the camps and the National Guard will go home, except perhaps from the cities. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-01_1204_national_guard_during_the_collapse.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-01_1204_national_guard_during_the_collapse.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, National Guard, collapse no Fri, 16 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor I got married in 1979 during record inflation. We were both in college working part-time to completely support ourselves since we had no student loans, no scholarships and no help from family. We lived in a cheap apartment and drove an old car, had no loans and paid all our bills, yet we saved up enough to tour Europe for a month before moving out of state for my entry-level job as an engineer. My wife worked part time as a clerk, had a kid with no Family Leave nor any kind of financial help yet we were able to buy a house at 10% down and 22% interest. Two more kids soon followed yet we bought a new car. Nothing going on in the economy made any difference to our quality of life. Same with the 1989 and 2008 crashes. The upcoming crash is set up to be worse but will it affect me or mine? Probably only tangentially. The fact is, I don’t think anyone will be affected in a real way: if you lose a lot of savings, so what, by definition you didn’t need that money anyway. It’s true that the best things in life are free, and kids don’t know that they’re poor. This only applies to people who live conscientious lives: folks out at the extremes may have to reel in their excesses, but even that isn’t clear because the concept of accountability is gone so they’ll probably get to keep their cake and eat it too. With student loan forgiveness, stimulus checks, bankruptcy, eviction prohibition & Basic Income, everybody be chillin’. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-01_1203_chillin_the_crash.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-09-01_1203_chillin_the_crash.mp3 2:47 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, collapse, crash no Wed, 14 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor “Prepping,” the idea that someone can prepare for coming hard times & lawlessness by stockpiling food & ammunition, comes from the realm of entertainment: books, movies, etc. that idolize those with foresight & self-reliance; not to mention the sense of superiority that comes from thinking they’re going to live while everyone else dies. Some preppers advocate escaping into the mountains with a bug-out bag, but most simply have large pantries and raise gardens. There is a sense of security that comes from these things but in the end, the preparation will be worthless if you consider the likely scenario. It won't take full-blown collapse, just the homeless roaming around would be a threat. They'll walk right into your garden and take what they want, they're used to that already, or they'll knock on your door asking for food; so will some of your neighbors. What are you going to do, shoot them? You're going to have to be secretive about what you have because there will be community meetings where they insist everyone has to share. The equality folks, egalitarians who think their feelings supersede your selfishness, will really be pushing that, and they control most of the levers of power: Blue states will probably even send jackboots to take your stuff for the good of everyone. You’re just prepping for someone else. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-08-30_1202_prepping_is_worthless.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-08-30_1202_prepping_is_worthless.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, prepping, preppers no Mon, 12 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The End of Times is upon us, at least our times. It will take a while before entrepreneurship becomes impossible, forcing more & more people onto Welfare or choosing Basic Income, until finally consumption exceeds production and all of society comes tumbling down. However, many of us were indoctrinated with a belief in liberty & self-reliance so there's at least 20% of the population that aren't complete incompetents, and could possibly bring society back. Plus, all this coming to a boil can actually be a good thing if we can also shuck off the smear merchants, race hustlers & communists. It would also be a good time to reign in predatory businesses like banking, broadband & pharmaceuticals. The change in comfort, convenience & expectations will lead to massive social upheaval, primarily against feminism, which is the ultimate cause of the whole situation since it advocates the dismantling of the Patriarchy, defined as the Western values of integrity, conscientiousness, honesty, meritocracy & work ethic. There will be a return to traditional family values because the opposition will disappear due to a lack of procreation because they think they’re saving the climate. The End of Times will be the beginning of old times. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-08-30_1201_end_of_times.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-08-30_1201_end_of_times.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, end of times, feminism no Sat, 10 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review more ideology & revolution concepts: 1. David Hume was in the right place at the right time with the right belief that people are motivated by biology. 2. Nietzsche has so many insightful quotes that it’s probable you haven’t heard them all. 3. It’s much more important that you have a diversity of societies than diversity within a society. 4. God’s Will didn’t go anywhere, just the people who play the part changed. 5. Joseph Smith’s Articles Of Faith include important civil values that make his believers good citizens. 6. The ideology within scripture conflicts with individualism. 7. America failed because its institutions failed. 8. Left vs. Right boils down to egalitarians vs. feudalists. 9. Liberty descends from the Age of Enlightenment. 10. The New Terror makes everywhere a gulag. 11. Malevolence is encouraged by passivity. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1200_ideology__revolution_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1200_ideology__revolution_concepts.mp3 2:48 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, ideology, revolution no Thu, 08 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There's a large portion of the population that hates America for the same reasons people hate anything: envy, resentment & a feeling of inadequacy; and it expresses itself as malevolence. This isn't a new phenomena, it's human nature; the difference now is democracy lets these dangerous individuals act as a group to enact their spite, perversity & sadism. And none of that is surprising either, democracy’s greatest weakness is tyranny of the majority: what’s surprising is the passivity of men in the face of this development. Men, apparently, choose not to believe what's happening, or simply capitulate rather than risk their complacency. Perhaps since women, feminists especially, are by-in-large propagators of the malevolence, consciously or not, and men, by their nature, subjugate themselves to their wives, that’s why there’s been no pushback, or it may even be that most men are content to let it happen because they too harbor envy, resentment & a sense of inadequacy, and want to experience the spite, perversity & sadism for themselves. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1199_malevolence_vs__passivity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1199_malevolence_vs__passivity.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, malevolence, passivity no Tue, 06 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The stereotypical fate of a Communist dissident was to be awakened out of bed at 4 am and hauled away to a re-education camp for decades of hard labor: think Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn who famously refused to repeat lies for personal gain or to even save himself from internment. He also wouldn’t allow repetition of propaganda. Those are laudable goals and worth mimicking; however, in an online environment where no one is held accountable for lying, and even if they are proven wrong, won’t rescind their statements but instead constantly repeat misinformation over-and-over, obliterating the truth. There is no defense except to Block them and delete their messages, citing Solzhenitsyn. Unfortunately, others will disagree, and by way of denigrating the intention, instead scoff at the specter of concentration camps and the old days of terror, not recognizing that there’s a new terror: now dissidents get #metooed, Trust Womened, gas-lighted, declared Right Wing, called racist, get discriminated against because they’re male or white; and ultimately, get Cancelled. The penalties may have changed but the intentions of the propagandists has not. Only public gun ownership has prevented the New Terror from morphing into the old Terror. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1198_the_new_terror.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1198_the_new_terror.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Solzhenitsyn, terror no Sun, 04 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It’s hard to believe because Americans take it for granted, but liberty is a relatively recent phenomena; only developed in what’s now called “The Age of Enlightenment,” originating in a single small country, Scotland, by 18 men in the 18th century. It was a flash-point in history like no other and probably won’t be repeated again after liberty is lost because liberty is a fragile thing, only kept alive by nurturing a society’s youth to its ideals, who otherwise default to some form of authoritarian oversight. In his famous 1784 essay “Answering the Question: What Is Enlightenment?” philosopher Immanuel Kant said: “Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. ‘Have the courage to use your own understanding,’ is therefore the motto of the enlightenment.” Though Kant didn’t exactly express the American understanding of liberty, reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of your own decisions, he did describe the anti-authoritarianism required to get there. In fact, American-style liberty is even more fragile and is under heavy assault by egalitarianism, seemingly certain to succumb to it, with no other source of liberty in sight. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1197_the_source_of_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1197_the_source_of_liberty.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, Age of Enlightenment no Fri, 02 Sep 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor As difficult as predicting when the new American revolution will come is trying to determine exactly what the sides are? Liberty, which is anti-authoritarian, has already been defeated so the question is which of the authoritarian interests will represent the two sides: collectivist or corporations. Simply using the label Left vs. Right doesn’t convey the true intentions of each side, and saying the obvious, that the sides are Marxists vs. Fascists fails because those words have extensive baggage that everyone denies. Therefore, the rhetorical differentiation needs words that have a meaning that matches the ideology but without the negative connotations. Since Marxists show pride in their egalitarian tendencies, the concepts of equality & equity; and Fascists can't deny that there are modern-day feudal lords, The 1% virtually enshrined as an aristocracy who pay less taxes and aren’t for the most part productive, instead depending on hourly workers to actually create things; perhaps a more acceptable delineation is egalitarians vs. feudalists. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1196_egalitarians_vs_feudalists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1196_egalitarians_vs_feudalists.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Feudalism, egalitarians, Fascists, Marxists no Wed, 31 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The U.S. is in an existential crisis, worse even than the Civil War because that wasn’t a complete deconstruction of everything America was built on. You know how bad it is by how many once-trusted institutions have failed us; even work against us. The most glaring example was the fraudulent Biden election, a literal soft coup implemented by a shady cabal of business & politicians of both parties who brag about their success. The FBI, CIA & other 3-letter agencies are completely compromised and no longer serve the public’s best interests. The judiciary can’t be trusted: biased judges & juries who convict police officers but not criminals. There’s constant attacks on gun rights; capriciously enforced laws; discrimination based on skin color or sex; hoaxes & bogus impeachments; not to mention the manipulated Stock Markets complete with insider-trading by elected & appointed officials. Possibly the worst though is the indoctrination of our youth by public education. But those aren’t all we’re talking about, there’s also the prosaic institutions like dictionaries that redefine words so that only whites can be “racists” or that “protests” include violence & destruction; universities that bar conservative speakers; Tech monopolies that censor speech based on political bias; and Lockdowns that bankrupt small businesses & prevent parishioners from attending services. There was no 4th of July celebration in the U.S. Capital, instead people were encouraged to attend BLM rallies which vandalized historic statues and officially-sanctioned painting of “BLM” on public streets. Of course, none of this would be possible without the totally biased, coordinated news media owned by Chinese. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1195_institutions_that_failed_us.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1195_institutions_that_failed_us.mp3 3:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, failed institutions no Mon, 29 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Considering the collectivist ideology expressed in the New Testament, it’s a wonder America became a nation of individualism: “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's.” - Mark 12:17 "Whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave." - Matthew 20:27 “Indeed, it is easier for a camel to pass through an eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." - Luke 18:25 “All the believers were together and had everything in common. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need.” - Acts 2:44-45 “Bear one another's burdens.” - Galatians 6:2 “Do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.” - Galatians 5:13 “Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.” - Matthew 25:40 “They must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain.” - Titus 1:11 “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” - Matthew 5:5 It’s bad but The Golden Rule still makes sense: Luke 6:31 - "Do to others as you would have them do to you" politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1194_scripture__ideology.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1194_scripture__ideology.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, scripture, ideology no Sat, 27 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Growing up Mormon, as children we memorized “The Articles of Faith” written in 1842 by the religion’s founder, Joseph Smith. Mostly they were just run-of the-mill religious beliefs definitely falling into the “faith” category, however the last 3 articles are secular: 11. We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may. 12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. 13. We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men. While the faith parts faded away as I matured, the secular admonitions have stayed with me and most present & past Mormons, which is why they make good citizens and employees. Other religions taught similar things in Sunday school but civil discourse in public schooling has disintegrated to the point where they are no longer able of instilling these important values, so as religion decreases, and more-and-more children are not raised with these guiding principles, the future of civil responsibility is in dire question. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1193_articles_of_faith.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1193_articles_of_faith.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Mormons, Articles of Faith, civil responsibility no Thu, 25 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor “God’s will” was certainly a convenient explanation for the arbitrary nature of life: Zeus himself was subject to fate. Fate is the belief that luck is controlled by an outside force. Fate was the accepted explanation for the vagaries of existence until The Enlightenment and the Modern concept of free agency & personal autonomy, which requires that people feel their decisions are their own and not preordained, nor a matter of otherworldly intervention. The ultimate maturation of this line of thinking, that everyone should control their own lives, was in the United States where individuals reaped the rewards or suffered the consequences of their own actions, and it was wildly successful for all as compared to anytime before such thinking, though not equally so. Unfortunately, Post Modern thought is that equality is the true goal, and predestination is back. However, instead of fate being the operative force, it’s a totalitarian state commanding outcomes, whose narcissistic elites act in the role of God’s will. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1192_gods_will.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1192_gods_will.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, fate, God's will, self determination no Tue, 23 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor How diverse can a society be? Can it simultaneously contain completely abhorrent fundamental beliefs and remain intact? If half the members of society believe in slavery and the other half doesn’t, can that society remain cohesive? Can democracy solve the problem? What if the majority want slavery? Or to prohibit religious worship? Or randomly kill its citizens? Rome was a society based on slavery and it lasted a thousand years. The Soviet Union was forcibly secular. The mesoamerican societies were based on blood sacrifice. So yes. But can a society serve opposing ideologies? For example, can it put the needs of the group over the wants of individuals yet still allow personal autonomy? Obviously, yes, as demonstrated by the various levels of socialism in countries all around the world, but there is a point where the individual is completely subsumed into the group as with Marxism, where equality is the goal, which is at complete odds with liberty: individuals reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of their own actions, because that causes inequality. So no, opposite ideologies cannot exist in a single society but it can someplace else, so it’s not diversity within a society that’s good, it’s a diversity of societies, then you can get out of the blood sacrifice one and go someplace else. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1191_society_diversity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1191_society_diversity.mp3 2:48 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, society diversity no Sun, 21 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The tortured soul that Friedrich Nietzsche was, never-the-less showed instances of great insight. Of the many quotes he’s famous for, here are some less renown: • A matter that becomes clear ceases to concern us. • A politician divides mankind into two classes: tools and enemies. • A thought comes when it will, not when I will. • He who has a why to live can bear almost any how. • In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. • Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen. • People are always angry at anyone who chooses very individual standards for his life; because of the extraordinary treatment which that man grants to himself, they feel degraded, like ordinary beings. • To sin against the earth is now the most dreadful thing. And we cannot leave out Nietzsche’s famous prediction that human’s will evolve into something much better: • What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1190_other_nietzsche_quotes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1190_other_nietzsche_quotes.mp3 2:52 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Friedrich Nietzsche no Fri, 19 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Of the 18 key figures that created The Enlightenment, the ideology that underpins Western society, David Hume, who explained that passion rather than reason governs human behavior, is the most insightful. Obviously, wise thinkers throughout history had recognized this most basic fact of psychology but it was Hume’s placement in Scotland during the 18th century that made him stand out. Modern science has supported his hypothesis with the discovery of chemicals in the brain that are the source of motivation: dopamine, serotonin, adrenaline, etc. This was a highly controversial position at the time; even now because it’s counter to altruistic or theological explanations, and puts homo sapiens on the same level with all living creatures. Hume’s ideas also put him at odds with other prominent figures like Voltaire & Rousseau, who thought that knowledge could be derived by reason alone without experiment or experience. However, Hume did find common cause with John Locke, another towering Enlightenment contributor, and others. What makes this ironic is that Hume made his scientific observations without the tools of science because it was The Enlightenment that developed science. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1189_david_hume.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-26_1189_david_hume.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, David Hume no Wed, 17 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review more politics & guns concepts: 1. Candidates get voluntarily conned. 2. Biden’s election made democracy illegitimate. 3. Teddy Roosevelt was one of history’s megastars. 4. Republicans let themselves be cucked for low taxes. 5. JFK would be run out of today's Democrat Party. 6. Ranked-Choice Voting is a long-needed fix to 2-party democracy. 7. The only logic in gun restrictions is illogic. 8. Gun confiscation has been the prelude to 50 million murders. 9. Banning guns for safety is unsafe. 10. Background checks create more crime than they prevent. 11. Just wearing a Guy Fawkes mask can make you a criminal. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1188_politics__guns_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1188_politics__guns_concepts.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, politics, guns no Mon, 15 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Famous revolutionaries from other countries include Che, who is the most famous, but Lenin is a close second. However, Great Britain gives celebrity to Guy Fawkes, famous for the “Gunpowder Plot” to blow up the British House of Lords in 1605. Adding to the legend, after he was sentenced to being hanged, drawn & quartered, just before his execution, he fell off the scaffold and died from a broken neck. There's even a Guy Fawkes day in Great Britain, November 5th, Bonfire Night, where in the past, children would make effigies of Guy Fawkes and roll them around in wheelbarrows asking neighbors: “penny for the guy,” then buy fireworks and throw the effigies on a bonfire. In 1982, the graphic novel "V is for Vendetta" by Alan Moore popularized the Guy Fawkes mask: the iconic smiling mustache & goatee. In the book and subsequent movie, the mask was dawned by the populace as part of their rebellion against tyranny. The mask was also adopted by the famously anti-authoritarian hacker group, Anonymous. From there it naturally became the de rigueur costume of anti-state repression demonstrators in Canada, so-much-so that in 2013 the Canadian parliament passed Bill C-309 which specifically made wearing the mask in such a setting a criminal offense: the same Canada that makes wearing a COVID mask mandatory: you can smell the irony from Guy Fawkes’ grave. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1187_guy_fawkes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1187_guy_fawkes.mp3 2:52 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Guy Fawkes no Sat, 13 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The national instant background check system, NICS, conducts background checks on people who want to buy a firearm from a Federal Firearms Licensee, like Walmart. So far in its history, the NICS has examined 40 million transactions: out of that there were 300,000 people who were prevented from buying a firearm. Out of those there were 2 thousand prosecutions. Out of that there were 44 convictions. That means 299,956 honest citizens were falsely accused. It’s obvious that criminals don’t buy their guns at Walmart: only honest people buy them there, and then wait 10 days. Criminals don’t wait, nor are they limited to one gun a month. Who exactly is the NICS affecting? And how detrimental to society is that compared to so many false accusations? Background checks are obviously a bad law because they can’t be justified by the results, are invasive to privacy, and have no value other than political grandstanding. Why is there still a NICS? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1186_background_checks.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1186_background_checks.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, NICS, background checks no Thu, 11 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Nothing identifies The Left like being anti-gun. It’s never clear what the anti-gunners argument is: something to do with safety. However, a firearm is only used by violent criminals about 8% of the time, yet it’s estimated that honest citizens use a firearm for self-defense over a half-million times a year, with over 70,000 prevented sexual assaults. People are thousands of times more likely to use a firearm in self-defense than to be a victim of a violent criminal who uses a gun. If safety is indeed the issue, it’s probably more productive for all those safety-first people to get on the banning Driver’s licenses bandwagon. Even though they personally might be good drivers, they’ll ostensibly get the bad driver’s as well. However, there’s 11 million people that drive without a license now, so as usual, only the law-abiding will suffer under the banning Driver's licenses strategy. This is obviously why banning Driver’s licenses is not a credible idea for saving lives. I wonder why The Left doesn’t think the same logic applies to guns? It must be something else they’re really after besides safety. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1185_banning_guns_for_safety.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1185_banning_guns_for_safety.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, gun restrictions, gun-grabbers no Tue, 09 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor In 1911, Turkey confiscated guns, and 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated. In 1929, the Soviet Union confiscated guns, and 20 million dissidents were exterminated. 1935: China confiscated guns. 20 million “enemies” were exterminated. 1938: Germany confiscated guns. 13 million “undesirables” were exterminated. 1959: Cuba confiscated guns. 11,000 “opposition” were exterminated. 1956: Cambodia confiscated guns. 1 million “educated” were exterminated. 1964: Guatemala confiscated guns. 100,000 Mayan Indians were exterminated. 1970: Uganda confiscated guns. 300,000 Christians were exterminated. The conventional excuse for gun confiscation is “don’t worry, the government will protect you.” Unfortunately, over 50 million defenseless people didn’t get the message. And waiting for the other shoe to drop: 1996 Australia, 2013 Venezuela & 2021 Afghanistan confiscated guns. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1184_gun_confiscation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1184_gun_confiscation.mp3 2:30 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, gun confiscation no Sun, 07 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor One of the more insidious strategies of gun-grabbers is to force gun owners to buy gun insurance. The first question is: how would insurance reduce whatever it is the gun-grabbers want to reduce? It doesn’t, of course, it just discourages gun ownership, or more likely, makes the vast majority of gun owners into criminals who can be prosecuted arbitrarily. Then there’s gun purchase age requirements: why 21? Why not 25 or even 100? What if there were a law that prevented Freedom of Speech until 21? Or 25? Or 100? Gun-grabbers point to cigarette age restrictions but smoking isn’t a constitutionally guaranteed right, and kids still smoke & drink anyway. Then there’s the gun-grabbing strategy of making guns a public health issue under the control of the CDC? Should the CDC be dictating the rules for guns? Or automobiles? Or sports? Or bathtubs? A strategy against proposed gun-grabber legislation would be to take the text of their new law, change only enough wording to turn the penalties & responsibilities back onto them, then introduce it simultaneously. For example, isn’t a gun already insurance? Shouldn’t people who don’t own guns have to buy cash insurance to match it? And with age requirements: if someone isn’t mature enough to own a gun until they’re 21, shouldn’t they be prohibited from joining the military or voting until that age? Gun restrictions are simply to get people used to the idea of gun confiscation. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1183_gun_restrictions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-25_1183_gun_restrictions.mp3 3:00 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, gun restrictions, gun-grabbers no Fri, 05 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor People are starting to accept the fact that strict majority-outcome democracy has some major flaws, particularly in the situation where the vote is split among conservative candidates but not for the liberal candidate so that even though the district is majority conservative, the liberal wins; or vice versa. One possible solution that is actually being implemented in some places is Ranked-Choice Voting, or RCV. The idea is that voters pick a second choice candidate too and the votes are calculated at least twice to see who wins. The biggest advantage of RCV is that it would allow Third Parties to actually compete. For example, a liberal-leaning voter could give their first vote to the candidate they liked the best, and the second vote to the establishment party: people would be unafraid of wasting their vote and candidates could be a much better fit for the jurisdiction. Unfortunately, like the Electoral College, RCV could have multiple winners, and it’s complicated by the different implementations, sometimes even multiple rounds of voting: that wouldn’t go over well. And does RCV really solve anything when one person is supposed to represent millions? Democracy has probably reached its expiration date regardless of how it’s done. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1182_ranked-choice_voting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1182_ranked-choice_voting.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Ranked-Choice Voting, RCV no Wed, 03 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor John F. Kennedy, JFK, was considered the ideal president in the last century. He was the youngest president too, and photogenic, which contributed to the fairytale quality of his administration, so-much-so that it was called “Camelot.” But he was also at the center of the Cuban Missile Crisis, 13 days in 1962: if that Russian submarine commander with the nuclear missile onboard had contacted his chain-of-command instead of surfacing, it could have been the end of everything. Then there was JFK’s Russian-sympathizer assassin, possibly orchestrated by the mob. All of that is certainly noteworthy enough to secure JFK’s place in history, but not his place in the Democrat party. Consider the time: JFK was liberty-centric & anti-Communist. The 4 collectivist programs he supported: military, judiciary, Welfare & Social security, was as far left as the old Dems used to go. Compared to Republicans and most Democrats of the time, he was downright revolutionary but today he would be considered a RINO. JFK wouldn’t be accepted by today’s Cultural Marxists. In fact, he almost blew the world up to stop the Commies, who the Democrats now aspire to be. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1181_jfk.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1181_jfk.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, JFK no Mon, 01 Aug 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Republicans have no ideology, nor anyone to promote it. No taxes; no abortion; is the only thing that separates them from Democrats. They don't have a plan to fight back against the encroachment of egalitarianism, nor do they even seem to be looking for one. The Republican party apparatus has a heavy NeoCon component that prefers authoritarianism, even Fascism; it needs to realign to support MAGA. Republicans also have no civilian organizations acting in their behalf, neither overtly nor covertly. Where’s their Antifa or BLM or Davos or SPLC or “fact checkers” or anything? They’ve completely lost the media, even letting Fox News go over to the other side. The election was a fraud yet where were the majority of Republicans in those States calling it out? Republicans lost the Senate because they drove off the Trumpers. At least half of Republicans are Covidians. There’s no charitable way to say this: Republicans are cucks. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1180_republican_cucks.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1180_republican_cucks.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Republicans no Sat, 30 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor President Theodore Roosevelt is my personal role model but he could never have been elected today. It's hard to go back 100 years and figure out the wisdom of Americans: read Teddy Roosevelt's biography, it's like something alien. At the time he was the most famous man in the world: riding up San Juan Hill with a troop he assembled and led in the only successful cavalry charge in history against an entrenched position with guns, his horse was shot out from under him, and both men to either side were killed. TR lost and buried his son while in Ecuador searching for the source of the Amazon, and ultimately died of the Yellow Fever he contracted there. Teddy’s progressive 10-point political platform from his Bull Moose days has since been fully adopted in the U.S. His hunting collection was the start of the Museum of Natural History. He established, organized, and funded the Conservation movement. His face is on Mt. Rushmore. What more proof do you need? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1179_teddy_roosevelt.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1179_teddy_roosevelt.mp3 2:11 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Teddy Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt no Thu, 28 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Joe Biden is not a legitimate president because his election was illegitimate. Trump lost by election fraud supported by constant MSM propaganda causing TDS in the majority of the population so that they chose to look the other way while the Never-Trumpers, Tech & The Swamp ignored the evidence. They only needed to target 4 counties to get the Electoral College, 4 States that Trump WON the 1st time. It’s pretty clear now that was the intent of “mail in” votes; they need votes, mail them in. Just look at the votes mysteriously dropped in the wee hours of the morning: Trump was ahead by 800K, 300K & 100K, and coincidentally, in each State Biden got just the number he needed. In fact, it was close to 100% votes for Biden; not even any write-ins candidates got votes, which is impossible. And GA had 40K ballots by 16-year olds, and another 160K by felons, 100-year olds, PO boxes, late registration & out-of-State votes. Amazingly, after the successful soft coup Time magazine admitted there was “a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election - an extraordinary shadow effort [that] touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time.” Trump got more votes than any sitting president in history yet we are to believe that a demented old fool with his hand in the cookie jar with empty rallies and an inability to speak got 10 million more than that? Credit to the CIA, or whoever rigged this thing: well done. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1178_biden_illegitimate.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1178_biden_illegitimate.mp3 3:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, election fraud, illegitimate, Biden no Tue, 26 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Elections are won by whoever has the largest constituency: their experience & resume is immaterial. The candidate has to belong to a large church, ethnic group, or some other dependable voting block. That’s the obvious side of elections but the underbelly is that the candidate’s primary role is to raise money for the party: no one ever asks, or even wants to know, what their position is on anything. Whether they win is not the most important thing. Political parties have a lot of expenses and make most of the cost to cover theses things by exploiting money out of naive, narcissistic, first-time candidates, going so far as to pressure them to borrow from their family & friends. The parties then attach huge costs to the campaign which the candidate is expected to pay for: managers, voting software, organization efforts, offices, the list is long. It’s a fortune even before promotional costs. The dismal fact is that nobody wins the first time they run, so the system embarrasses & bankrupts an endless stream of hopeful but futile once-and-outers. The corruption is so insidious that only former candidates know about it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1177_getting_elected.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1177_getting_elected.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, candidates no Sun, 24 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review some social justice concepts: 1. Honesty in news reporting was lost when the Fairness Doctrine was abandoned. 2. Communists in pre-war Germany would have instantly recognized Wokeness as Marxism. 3. Black Nationalism is no better nor worse than White Nationalism. 4. Being “black” or “white” is no longer an issue of race. 5. Anti-anti doesn’t make a positive. 6. Men don’t want to be at war with women so they surrendered. 7. Women no longer understand subservience but men still do. 8. Bezmenov predicted everything that’s happening in America today because he helped light the fuse. 9. Joseph Stalin was a sincere sociopath with unlimited power: the worst kind. 10. The Left intends to flip everything on its head. 11. Democrat OWGs must want to be dupes. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1176_social_justice_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1176_social_justice_concepts.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, social justice no Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Left has no use for old white guys, OWGs, except to use them as dupes, especially when it comes to obfuscating the true intentions of Leftism: for example, Gun Control is an obvious cover for gun confiscation but the OWGs in the Democrat party continually deny it. Another example: feminists are pretty honest about their intentions to assume superiority but for tactical reasons they let their OWGs be duplicitous about equality. Same thing with Critical Race Theory, Marxism, and hoaxes like Climate Alarmism & Lockdowns: it's always the Democrat OWGs running interference. Maybe it’s because they don’t want to admit to themselves what Leftism’s true intentions are? Or perhaps they’re motivated by mischief, malevolence, or even masochism? Do they know that if they win, OWGs are going to be the losers no matter what their past actions were: toadies will be shackled right along with everyone else. It’s been pointed out to them time-and-again that they’re dupes but they must like it that way? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1175_owg_dupes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1175_owg_dupes.mp3 2:19 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, OWG, old white guys no Wed, 20 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Though both the Left and the Right are authoritarian, they are generally distinguishable as the losers or the winners in society: the status quo vs. those who want to be. The Right is normally in control because feudalism works; however, when inequality gets bad enough, resentment & despair will swell the ranks of the Left until they threaten the established order, eventually toppling it, but only lasting until the fundamental weakness of their egalitarian ideology causes an inevitable disintegration of society, which is then again picked back up by the Right. In the meantime, while the Left is making their play for power, all values are turned upside-down. It’s the Left vs. the Constitution: constrained speech; the Left vs. medicine: sex is a social construct; the Left vs. merit: diversity hiring; the Left vs. Science: censor conflicting facts; the Left vs. progress: environmental alarmism; the Left vs. math: 2 + 2 = 5; the Left vs. personal responsibility: the state provides; the Left vs. men: toxic masculinity; the Left vs. religion: denigrate morals. Basically, it’s the Left vs. everything. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1174_the_left_vs_everything.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-24_1174_the_left_vs_everything.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, the left no Mon, 18 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Joseph Stalin led the Soviet Union from 1924 until his death in 1953. He rose to power by ruthlessly exploiting his bureaucratic role as secretary of the Bolshevik party, where he was in charge of record keeping & correspondence. He used that power to control the party and eliminate his competition. Stalin was of average intelligence, and had the sociopathy of an Asperger’s. He was certainly a force to be reckoned with: tough-minded, combative & sly. What made him particularly effective was that he truly believed in Marxist ideology, and did not embrace the comfortable advantages of his position: dressing in the rough-woven clothes and eating the gruel of the average peasant; living in a single room with only a wooden fireplace that he stoked himself. Stalin converted the Soviet Union from agrarianism into an industrial power using forced labor camps. The transition resulted in famines that killed 10 million people, some intentionally because they resisted his changes. He had millions more who did not fully embrace communism, so-called “enemies of the Soviet Union,” executed, exiled, or imprisoned during the Great Purge. However, Stalin wasn’t evil, he simply pursued egalitarianism, with the perverse, vindictive & deadly behavior it inspires. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1173_joseph_stalin.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1173_joseph_stalin.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Joseph Stalin no Sat, 16 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Yuri Bezmenov was a former Soviet KGB informant who defected to Canada in the 1970s. He was one of the world’s outstanding experts on the subject of Soviet propaganda, disinformation & active measures to subvert western culture. In 1984, in his book, “Love Letter to the West,” he laid out the four steps necessary to create a Marxist police state in America without firing a shot; they were: Demoralization: religion is commercialized; education is made relative; media is monopolized & manipulated to create an uninformed myopia in the populace; a culture of false heroes & role models; manipulation of media & academia to brainwash young people. Destabilization: mistrust justice; lack of individual responsibility; a sense of defenselessness; disunity internally & isolation abroad; loyalty to state over family; enfeebled masses; racial division; urbanization; victimhood; bribe the populace with benefits; massive government. Crisis: revolutionary change of power, and: Normalization: which is the populace acquiesces. Bezmenov’s final statement was, “There is no other place on this planet to defect to.” He would be very disappointed if he were alive today. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1172_bezmenov.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1172_bezmenov.mp3 2:42 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Bezmenov, Marxism no Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor We all live in a delusion fostered by the stories we’re told and the entertainment we consume: we think the good guy wins out and merit begets success, but the stark fact is, almost everyone is a failure at almost everything they do because they are at the mercy of someone. Who & what you end up to be is mostly the result of who pulls your strings: your family, your work, your church, and to a lesser extent, government. We are all subservient to the powers-that-be but men have the advantage of being raised in a Male Dominance Hierarchy, so males know who their betters are, and more importantly, who they are better than; but women and boys who were protected from bullying & failure are psychologically unprepared for subservience, and so take men’s stoicism as smug self-assurance & entitlement, when in reality it’s the quiet desperation of knowing one’s place. Women are under the misimpression that they’re the ones who are subservient but if they knew what that actually entailed, they wouldn’t want to reverse roles. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1171_subservience.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1171_subservience.mp3 2:05 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, subservience no Tue, 12 Jul 2022 06:00:00 -0700 politics & humor America is not ready for the men vs. women debate; in fact, it’s a no-go topic which is why men are losing, but the fact remains that the problems occurring in the U.S. aren’t the result of some other fault-line: it’s NOT Democrats vs. Republicans; it’s NOT Liberals vs. Conservatives; it’s NOT Fascists vs. Communists; but it IS men vs. women. Men had control until the 1960s then more and more women started voting for what they wanted, and eventually they got control; that’s why they have a democracy fetish; that’s why all out-groups seem fixated on democracy. The reason is simple: who wants to be second best? Few women can compete with testosterone so almost all women are egalitarians at heart because it benefits them most while blunting the testosterone advantage of men. There isn't any logic or rationality behind most of their complaints, it’s just camouflage for women taking charge, and being able to say anything they want because parents aren’t willing to disagree with their daughters, and men aren’t willing to argue with their wives. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1170_men_vs_women.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1170_men_vs_women.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, men, women, control no Sun, 10 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor One of the most important weapons in psychological war is to distort the language by changing the definition of words: for example, “racism” is now defined as any inequality between races rather than discrimination against a race. Another tactic is to create new slogans from existing words that suggest a meaning that is completely opposite: for example, cultural values like conscientiousness, punctuality, courtesy, integrity & ambition are called “white supremacy,” while “patriarchy” is now defined as liberty, meritocracy & patriotism. Words have even reversed meanings, for example: anti-fascism is fascism, anti-racism is racism, anti-bullying is bullying, science is anti-science, news in anti-news, and speech is anti-speech. Most people have no idea what the new meanings are and simply presume the old meanings. All of this is to make it so that things that were once considered good are now presented as bad, and if it goes on long enough, they will be. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1169_anti-anti.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1169_anti-anti.mp3 2:09 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, racism, patriarchy, white supremacy no Fri, 08 Jul 2022 06:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The huge problem people have when discussing race is that don’t agree on what it is: old-timers think race means skin color but in the modern age, race is only a social construct independent of color: people with light-colored skin can be Black, and as the president of the United States publicly stated, dark-skinned people who don’t agree with the BLM agenda aren’t Black. That brings up the question of what is Black? Here’s what the Smithsonian, the premiere intellectual institution in the U.S., said was White: politeness, hard work, self-reliance, logic, planning & family cohesion, so-called “White Supremacy.” If BLM is against White Supremacy then presumably Black is: impolite, lazy, dependent, illogical, chaotic & immoral. If people must choose sides, as the agitators demand, then every American has to make the choice: do they want to be “White” or “Black”? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1168_race.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-23_1168_race.mp3 2:06 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, race no Wed, 06 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Nationalism and patriotism often get intertwined: patriotism is a sense of attachment to country and an alliance with other citizens to protect that sense of camaraderie, while nationalism is the belief that a particular culture constitutes a distinct people deserving of political self-determination. American Blacks are torn between the two: on the one hand, patriotism is colorblind and Blacks have lots of allies against the rest of the world who want forced sharing. However, there are plenty of Black Nationalists who want a nation of their own, and little pushback against this narrative. In fact, the call for reparations could be seen as a first step towards that goal. It’s blatant hypocrisy that Whites who want the same thing, even including parting with a lot their wealth, are vilified. Both patriotism and nationalism are compatible with liberty, but neither are acceptable to egalitarians who want every nation operating collectively and ruled by a central government; where there is neither patriotism nor nationalism, and everybody, no matter their color, is given reparations until all are equal. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-22_1167_black_nationalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-22_1167_black_nationalism.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Nationalism, Black Nationalism no Mon, 04 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor “Fascist” is a common epithet in American discourse: it means anybody who doesn’t agree with egalitarianism, the quest for all things being equal. In historical context, between WWI and WWII Germany was ruled by the democratically-elected Weimar Republic: famous for rampant inflation, weak control of security & deconstruction of social norms: the wokeness of the time. In the streets, the Fascists fought the Communists for control. Both sides thought authoritarian elites should tell everyone else what to do, the difference being Fascists thought those elites should be corporations, and the Communists thinking it should be the State. Repeating history, America has entered the Wokemar Republic stage: Neocons, the globalist component of the Republican party, Fascists, are on one side. They are evenly matched with Democrat egalitarians, Commies, also with global ambitions. Assuming the same thing that happened in Germany happens here since the situations are so similar, those two groups are going to conflict but either side winning will still result in authoritarianism, private or public, in control, which means proponents of liberty, which is anti-authoritarian at its core, aren't going to survive. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-22_1166_wokemar_republic.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-22_1166_wokemar_republic.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Fascist, Communists, Weimar no Sat, 02 Jul 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The greatest weakness of Capitalism is that everything is for sale, including our news. This has always been a problem but the vibrancy of market economics naturally inspired multiple newspapers in every town with opposing views to somewhat equally represent the political space. Unfortunately, another weakness of Capitalism, the concentration of wealth & power, inevitably allowed single organizations to dominate the narrative by buying all news outlets; not just newspapers, but radio & television too. To combat that, laws were passed, the so-called Fairness Doctrine, that prevented such blanket ownership, and when there was an inadvertent monopoly in a particular market, it required opposing arguments to be given somewhat equal coverage. This lead to the golden age of journalism, where the public trusted & respected the media. Regrettably, those few decades of Edwin R. Murrow-style honesty were a fluke, only possible because of government regulation. When the media was deregulated due to political machinations, the excesses of Capitalism were again unleashed, and the media became not only a laughingstock, but intensely dangerous. The Fairness Doctrine was not only fair, it was safe. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-22_1165_fairness_doctrine.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-22_1165_fairness_doctrine.mp3 2:30 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, fairness doctrine no Thu, 30 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review more law & society concepts: 1. Extreme penalties are political ploys to cultivate suburban votes. 2. Bad laws are worse than no laws at all. 3. Civil Asset Forfeiture violates the tenet of due process of law. 4. The State has a monopoly on violence because it’s better than Free Market violence. 5. Incarceration is the equivalent of a college education in some communities. 6. Drugs don’t have to be legalized, just not illegal. 7. There’s not a lot of stories about Americans emigrating someplace else. 8. Without California farming, the whole world would suffer. 9. The Sharing Economy should include sharing childcare. 10. It’s up to the husband to keep a marriage together. 11. Millennials hate what their Boomer parents loved. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-21_1164_law__society_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-21_1164_law__society_concepts.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, law, society no Tue, 28 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Boomers are the people who grew up during the 60s/70s and Millennials are their kids who grew up in the 80s/90s. Like every parents/children generation before them, animosity develops: mostly out of resentment from the younger generation of being subservient to & overshadowed by the older; while the older are jealous to be young & relevant again. Boomers are being pushed out by Millennials: out of their jobs, out of their influence, out of power; otherwise society would remain the same, which it certainly hasn’t, now more than ever. What you see happening in this decaying and divided nation is the incoming Millennials with new priorities: it’s not Boomers changing their minds late in life, but it’s partially their fault: Boomers are responsible for raising their Millennial children to be pretentious, entitled, self-centered & foolish. It was a way Boomer women gained status. Boomer men can be blamed for a similar level of selfishness by encouraging wealth concentration & conspicuous consumption, but that’s where Boomer guilt ends. In a democracy, simply majorities determine politics, and feminists, minorities & weirdos have the numbers; and social media provided the mechanism to making this changeover complete, and Millennials just happened to be there for the ride. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-21_1163_boomers_vs_millennials.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-21_1163_boomers_vs_millennials.mp3 2:38 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Millennials, Boomers no Sun, 26 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor YouTube is full of channels of men giving other men dating advice, an increasing so-called Manosphere where the attributes of masculinity are encouraged and the scourge of feminism derided. Many of these aspiring mentors have been married previously but they are single now and all have an excuse why. After almost a half-century of successful marriage to a woman I met when I was 18, I have some advice so that you don’t have to join the Manosphere: stay married. Outside of downright contempt, where your wife is worse than an enemy, most marriages can continue indefinitely, no-matter-what, if the husband is flexible. First, if your wife’s overweight, encourage her to lose weight: why? Sex. Women don’t care after menopause but men have sex drive all of their lives, and it’s the main reason they got married in the first place. Everything else: companionship, children & convenience are just additional benefits. Second, please the wife. That’s actually pretty easy even though it’s vague: if you’re overweight, lose weight too, then plan interactions: I thought my wife didn't want to go out until I actually took her dancing. Thirdly, compliment your wife’s appearance and insist she wear her attractive clothes & jewelry. These are all simple things that are up to you to initiate because the old adage is indeed true: a happy wife is a happy life. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-21_1162_pleasing_the_wife.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-21_1162_pleasing_the_wife.mp3 2:46 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, manosphere, wife no Fri, 24 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor America has huge pent up capacity for sharing because we have so much of everything: products, places, time, grandparents. There are Sharing Economy apps to utilize underused assets, like cars, sports equipment, odd jobs, home exchanges, most anything you can imagine. Most of these will fail because they aren’t commercial or just can't get enough folks to sign up but the concept is good. At the same time, childcare expenses have become insurmountable for most families, and it’s per child. Communal child-rearing is how children were raised for millennia, and it used to be grandparents would watch the kids, but America is very mobile, and many families don’t have that option. However, there are still lots of grandparents around that can be shared using an app: available & willing grandparents could tend someone else’s grandkids, trading their time for their own grandkids somewhere else. The vetting process would be thorough but not onerous, and government would have to remove any restrictions, then other institutions would jump on the bandwagon. Sharing childcare is just the kind of thing technology can solve. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-20_1161_childcare_sharing_economy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-20_1161_childcare_sharing_economy.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, childcare, sharing economy no Wed, 22 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor California, because of the weather, is a beautiful place to live and farm. In fact, at about $50 billion annually, farming would be of tremendous economic importance to any other state but it’s only 2% of California’s GDP. California farms grow a significant portion of fruits, vegetables & nuts: for example, 88% of the nation’s strawberries. There’s 77,000 farms on 25 million acres of land, 9 million of which are irrigated with no riparian, water, rights. Agriculture approaches 70% of total water consumption in California while urban use: drinking, lawns, parks, golf courses, etc.; account for only 10%. With numbers like that, even if every lawn in California was dead due to lack of watering, it wouldn’t make much of a dent in consumption, but there is always intense drought alarmism: California declared drought from 2011–2019, yet farm production was unaffected. Also, because of the farming, California attracts huge numbers of both legal & illegal immigrates, over a million a year, and the farm economy rests on exploitation of this cheap labor which is the primary reason America’s southern border is ignored. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-20_1160_california_farming.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-20_1160_california_farming.mp3 2:44 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, California farming no Mon, 20 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There’s lots of talk about immigration, spelled with an “i,” with millions of migrants wanting to come into the U.S. yearly, but there’s also emigration, spelled with an “e,” from the U.S., where people go to live in some other country, usually because it’s less expensive, but also to escape something: politics, legal entanglements, family. The number is not very large, only 3-5 million total American expatriates, and many of those are only temporary: less than 5,000 former Americans a year actually renounce their citizenship, usually for tax reasons. Retirees are the biggest emigrant cohort with many choosing Central American countries as their final destination, often settling in some walled-in White community living off their savings. Unfortunately, most Americans take for granted a Protestant work ethic and the integrity & punctuality that comes with it, so are surprised when they find out the rest of the world does not share those values. The whole concept of so-called “White Supremacy:” conscientiousness, courtesy, ambition; is not a part of other cultures; it’s an American privilege. Many an aspiring U.S. emigrant, spelled with an “e,” soon learns why there are so many aspiring U.S., spelled with an “i,” immigrants. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-20_1159_emigrating.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-20_1159_emigrating.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, emigration, immigration no Sat, 18 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Most people don’t understand why so many choose to use drugs. Who but a drug user would be able to answer? Maybe someone who tried drugs, had a fabulous experience but decided not to do it again because they didn’t have the willpower to stop; they would know people use drugs because of the euphoria it gives them. For all the hand-wringing about the importance of “happiness,” drug users have it, at least while they’re high. Everyone else should be happy that they’re happy. There’s a twilight area where drug use & sales could be a misdemeanor at the court’s discretion: that keeps them from being commercialized, gives people a reason not to use them, and leaves little room for extortion & crime because so what if the police know. If drugs are only pseudolegal, there would be no big business, no creating a customer base, no advertising, no online campaigns run by algorithms to get people to take more. Folks growing dope & poppies in their backyard is a whole lot different than corporate controlled marijuana farms and mass-manufactured food items containing it. The argument against legalizing drugs is that society pays, but society pays one-way-or-the-other. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-19_1158_legalize_drugs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-19_1158_legalize_drugs.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, legalize drugs no Thu, 16 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Societies require punishment because sociopaths, 4% of any population, will act against other people’s interests unless the risk is greater than the reward; and psychopaths, 1% of the population, are criminals because they enjoy it. Incarceration, a liberal concept, is the ultimate threat since executions are negligible, and obviously it’s exercised a lot if the amount of prisoners in America is the measure: over 2 million; the highest per capita in the world; yet it’s hard to get a prosecutor to take a case unless it’s a slam dunk because they don’t want to lower their conviction rate, and attorneys aren’t interested in convicting innocent people, no matter how much they’re paid. The simple reason America has more prisoners is because we prosecute more guilty people; the side-effect of an effective judiciary. Unfortunately, overall, it’s unclear that warehousing criminals is beneficial to society: prisons & jails are overflowing, and over a third of all prisoners are Black. Serving time has even become a symbol of legitimacy & honor for some segments of the population, making prisons the equivalent to a university education. The impact this has locally is devastating because few of their youth escape the lifestyle. The destruction of some communities is so complete, their citizens would rather have no police at all rather than continue incarcerating so many of their own. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-19_1157_incarceration.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-19_1157_incarceration.mp3 2:43 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, incarceration no Tue, 14 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The only thing keeping someone from taking your stuff, raping your wife & killing you is someone else stronger. You by yourself cannot compete with psychopaths and their lusty cousins from committing harm. Even if you band together with your neighbors into a militia, there’s always a bigger one, and that’s assuming you can trust your militia not exploit their power against you. This situation can only be solved via a monopoly on violence: where one enforcement entity, presumably trustworthy & equal-handed, is the only one that can act with deadly force. This is the genesis of the state whose primary purpose has always been security & protection. Nations with weak governments that allow private militias are the most ineffective at protecting their citizens. Arguably, if the state enforcement entities are biased or untrustworthy, it’s worse than anarchy, but better one enemy than many. Unfortunately, the institutions we’ve depended on have compromised themselves for political reasons, and the citizenry may be forced to rescind the monopoly on violence. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-19_1156_monopoly_on_violence.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-19_1156_monopoly_on_violence.mp3 2:15 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, monopoly on violence no Sun, 12 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Criminal Asset Forfeiture requires someone to be convicted of a crime before government authorities can seize their assets but Civil Asset Forfeiture is when government seizes assets before there is even a charge, and the victim can only get the assets back by suing the government in Civil court at their own expense, and rarely win if they do. There are many cases of people not accused of a crime having their cash taken from them with no explanation given: it’s never even recorded: the story is that it’s split among the officers in the police department. Civil Asset Forfeiture makes police into little more than state-sponsored highwaymen: legalized thievery at the point of a gun. According to the DOJ, the justification for civil forfeiture is “revenue for law enforcement.” How this doesn’t violate the Forth & Eight Amendments of The Constitution, which protect against government seizures, can only be explained by the U.S. Supreme Court since 84% of Americans oppose Civil Asset Forfeiture. Since the Supreme Court won’t act, 3 states have abolished it and 35 have reformed it, which still leaves 12 states that continue this unpopular & unethical practice, that for some strange, inexplicable reason, is legal? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-18_1155_civil_asset_forfeiture.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-18_1155_civil_asset_forfeiture.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, civil asset forfeiture no Fri, 10 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Bad laws are laws that breed contempt for all laws. These are the unenforced laws, selectively enforced laws, and laws that simply can’t be enforced. People are also suspicious of all the new laws every year: how come? Society did just fine with last year’s laws, same for laws a decade ago; there’s even a compelling argument that laws made a century ago are better than today’s laws. Everyone knows there’s so many laws nobody even keeps track of them so the whole system has been gamed by lobbyists for laws written just for them: those are truly bad laws. Worst are the laws that turn a large portion of the population into de facto lawbreakers: drug laws top that list. Drug use can’t be prevented without making a huge portion of the population into criminals, especially with such arbitrary rules where a state can decriminalize marijuana but the Feds can still prosecute. Gun laws are another example: our society is based on guns so stop making law-abiding citizens unlaw-abiding. Then, of course, there’s tax laws: most people pay none, both rich & poor, leaving everyone else to be a law-breaker any chance they get. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-18_1154_bad_laws.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-18_1154_bad_laws.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, bad laws no Wed, 08 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor One of the concepts ushered in by The Enlightenment was penal reform. Before that penalties were harsh: torture and execution were the primary sentences because there weren’t prisons simply because they weren’t practical, except debtors’ prisons where people who owed money worked off their debt. The idea of rehabilitation wasn’t even considered. Liberalism changed all that but extreme penalties still persist: 3 Strikes, mandatory sentencing & civil forfeiture are examples; there are even prominent people calling for the execution of Fentynl-maker CEOs. Other examples: they execute drug traffickers in several nations and there are no drugs there; and there are nations where women are stoned if they have premarital sex, and there's not a lot of premarital sex there; there’s even a nation that imprisons people for chewing gum, and you know there's no gum chewing there. There are some very concerning trends: in one year, 10,000 more arrest warrants were given out in Ferguson, MO, a Black community, than there were people, and prisoners are being made to pay the cost of their incarceration. This may be why so many imprisonable offenses make no sense: drug use? Driving violations? White collar crime? Instead penalties could be house arrest, fines or suspend driver’s licenses. Unfortunately, staying home & fines don’t change people’s behavior, and what to do with people who don’t pay the fine? A quarter of all drivers drive without licenses now. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-18_1153_extreme_penalties.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-18_1153_extreme_penalties.mp3 2:51 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, penalties no Mon, 06 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review more economic & retirement concepts: 1. Boiled down to fundamentals, all economics is a Ponzi scheme. 2. Slavery has always been and will always be, though the definition may change. 3. American manufacturing capacity can usually stretch to the situation. 4. No Fault insurance is unpopular among lawyers who make money from finding fault. 5. Capitalists swim in a cesspool of bribes & extortion. 6. There’s no such thing as Social Security Reserves. 7. They never say it but the Fed’s primary job is to protect pensions. 8. Ridiculous government pensions undermine faith in government. 9. Even people without much money can still stack silver. 10. Implicit trade barriers are much harder to remove than explicit ones. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-17_1152_economics__retirement_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-17_1152_economics__retirement_concepts.mp3 2:33 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, economics, retirement no Sat, 04 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor American’s shop for value: the most bang for the most buck. There are people who buy for status, and people who only buy the very best, but traditionally American product designers aim for a high feature/cost ratio, so-much-so that we take this strategy for granted. However, Americans who have lived overseas, especially in Europe, are surprised to find that’s not the case around the world, where the choice is usually only between the cheapest and the best. That’s because socialist nations are not used to buying for value, and are subsequently overcharged for everything, at least from our perspective. Unfortunately, in the rest of the world, the value found in American-made goods is dismissed as shoddiness. It creates a kind of implicit trade barrier that nobody ever talks about: consumers in other countries: Germans, French, Asians, will not buy American products; it's unfashionable, and American goods are considered inferior. American car-makers have really suffered from this: ask any foreigner and they'll say American cars are poorly made. Same with electronics. Definitely with food items, which are considered “junk food” or even unsafe. No amount of reducing explicit trade barriers will overcome this implicit one. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-17_1151_implicit_trade_barriers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-17_1151_implicit_trade_barriers.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, trade barriers, value no Thu, 02 Jun 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There’s 166,500 tons of gold in the world, all together it would fit into an olympic-sized swimming pool. In contrast, there’s about 100,000,000 tons of silver in circulation, so about 550 times more silver than gold. The value of everything in the world is estimated at $100 trillion, so if currency were tied to silver, silver would be $100,000 per ounce and gold would be around a billion dollars an ounce. Obviously, there’s no connection between the price of gold or silver with currency or each other, but the allure remains and people still like to “stack silver.” Stacking silver literally means what is says: the satisfaction that comes from the tactile feel when stacking silver coins. It could be as a hedge against inflation, perhaps useful if the government-backed medium of exchange breaks down, maybe even an investment. However, there’s not many instances of any of those reasons so we have to consider that the security factor of actual possession of vintage & new silver coins minted in the U.S., called Constitutional silver, is why people stack. To be pedantic about it: when those coins were minted, the amount of silver at the time only equaled 73.5% of the face value with 90% purity, so about 66 cents of silver in a dollar back then; of course, the silver is worth much more now but a nickel is still worth a nickel’s worth of nickel. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-17_1150_stacking_silver.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-17_1150_stacking_silver.mp3 2:48 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, silver no Tue, 31 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Social Security & Medicare obligations are staggeringly underfunded, $100 trillion at least, and that’s not even including government pension obligations, which are truly obscene. Consider that the average Social Security per person is under $2K/month: compare that to state government pension benefits of NY firemen of $20K/month, and CA’s ex-Treasurer gets $50K/month: there’s even an OR health official that gets $76K/month! The pension crisis is real, unsustainable, and the funds are going to crash no-matter-what. For private pensions, the PGBC will take over and turn them into something more like Social Security levels, but the real problem is State pensions because they have State Violence to ensure that $76K/month. Let that sink in... Now ask yourself how that happened? Anybody can be replaced by 10,000 other people: how did someone get a $76K/month pension? Or even $76K/year for that matter working for the government producing nothing. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-17_1149_ridiculous_government_pensions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-17_1149_ridiculous_government_pensions.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, government, pensions no Sun, 29 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Supposedly there's $24 trillion of retirement funds in the Stock Market but even that only represents about half of what is owed to retirees. Retirement is a Ponzi scheme where new workers pay in but it's not enough to make payments to retired workers. Therefore the Market has to increase by at least 5% yearly to keep retirees from freaking out, especially voters, but the Market doesn't have any low risk investments of that magnitude except for the indexes which are dominated by the so-called FAANG stocks: keep those 5 companies up for the Market index to go up. The Fed uses interest rates and Open Market Operations to maintain a minimum yearly growth. Low interest rates allow companies to borrow money to buy back their own stock: the loans just keep getting rolled, and as long as they're interest free, it can go on forever. This elevates the share price which pleases the shareholders, triggers huge bonuses for management and keeps pension fund managers happy. Unfortunately, that means the price of those stocks is not tied to any fundamental underlying value of the companies, and the bubble has become so large that when it finally pops, retirees are going to be left with nothing. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-17_1148_the_fed_vs__pensions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-17_1148_the_fed_vs__pensions.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, retirement no Fri, 27 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor A common misconception is that government can save money, specially Social Security, and that there is a cache of money called the Social Security Reserve that is going to run out. That’s an intentional fabrication perpetrated by political demagogues because the constraint is only a legal one: the original Social Security legislation wanted to prevent any money for Social Security coming from general tax revenues, it was the political compromise at the time, so the law says that only money collected specifically as Social Security can be paid out as Social Security. If Social Security needed more money, that clause could be struck from the original law by the very same demagogues. America has come a long way in its spending habits since those halcyon days of old-school accounting & balanced budgets. The whole idea of fiscal responsibility has been abandoned: government now prints as much money as it wants whenever it wants so government would simply act unilateral to fund whatever Social Security needed regardless of so-called reserves. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-16_1147_social_security_reserves.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-16_1147_social_security_reserves.mp3 2:15 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, social security no Wed, 25 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Capitalism is based on avarice so strong it overcomes even fear, anger & lust which would otherwise shape society, so as bad as greed may be, it’s better than the alternative. Unfortunately, in a Capitalist society everything is for sale: loyalty, trust, integrity. It’s not surprising that an economic theory with such compromised roots would have such critical weaknesses. Government’s virtuous intent is to keep Capitalism’s vices in check but as government becomes more authoritarian, Capitalism exploits it by subverting a critical civil servant in the chain of command either through bribes, politicians are the prime example: successful candidates are de facto corrupt; they had to be to get elected; or extortion: every man has sexual peccadilloes they would be embarrassed to be made public: infidelity, porn addictions, chargeable sex offenses from their past; threatening exposure is enough to turn them into puppets. It’s so bad that in the cesspool of Capitalism, people who won’t compromise themselves are considered abnormal. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-16_1146_capitalist_cesspool.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-16_1146_capitalist_cesspool.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Capitalism, government, authoritarian no Mon, 23 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The odd thing about insurance is that nobody ever wants to collect, they just want to have it. Unfortunately, there’s the moral hazard of insurance where people act irresponsible because they are insured, or even cause intentionally damage so they collect on the insurance. There’s also the perverse incentive of fault-based insurance, somebody else can trigger your insurance to pay them: intentionally harming themselves or pretending since pain is subjective. This is the way people without insurance get rich from your insurance. That’s why a dozen states have No Fault insurance, which means if someone else hits you with their car, it doesn't matter, your insurance covers you and their insurance covers them: no lawsuits, no Civil court, no worrying if they’re insured, no paying for Uninsured motorist. The only lawyers will be Criminal lawyers determining whether laws were broken. However, insurance only really works if everybody is insured. If half the drivers drive without insurance, even if they suffer the consequences financially, they aren’t included in the insurance pool so your premiums will have to be increased to cover the additional risk. Combine that with all the hanger-on industries that exploit insurance, and soon, like medical insurance, it becomes unreasonably priced for the amount of security it provides. Insurance deserves the poor reputation it has, no fault of your own. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-16_1145_no_fault_insurance.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-16_1145_no_fault_insurance.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, no fault insurance, insurance no Sat, 21 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor One of the stunning things that Lockdowns showed us was that the U.S. manufacturing capability & supply chain is very robust. Even with most of the nation not working, there was still enough excess capacity in reserve to quickly expand to fill the need, minimizing the time of shortages, real or manufactured, to at most a couple of months. However, we don’t have infinite flexibility, if people want to slide into even less productivity, America’s capacity can eventually be overwhelmed. Inflation occurs when production is less than consumption. Limiting consumption to production is difficult without keeping score, which is what money does but the unending stream of newly-printed money has removed that feedback mechanism, so something else less controllable will have to limit inflation: price controls don’t work, having been tried multiple times; in fact, any kind of gate-keeping causes more harm than good, otherwise command economies like Communist nations use would be the ideal. With 100 million Americans not working because they’re retired, and another 100 million who don’t want to work, there’s an obvious solution to increasing capacity, but laziness is a toughie to overcome, and incompetence is impossible. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-15_1144_capacity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-15_1144_capacity.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, capacity, productivity, consumption no Thu, 19 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The infamous NYT 1619 Project postulates that America’s success is the result of using slavery. They point to Rome and ask when was there societal advancement without slaves? How many wars of the past were fought just to get slaves for the conquerors? Slaves laid the foundation of everything, they say. However, change the definition of “slave” only a tiny bit, and many people today live the lives of slaves: Minimum Wage jobs; prostitution; family obligations. Most people are constantly at the beck & call of someone: we’re all slaves in some way or another. But actually, America’s success was due to liberty, not slavery, otherwise South America would have been successful too since they imported 10x more slaves. If serfs & peons are the equivalent of slaves then all of the Middle East, Russia & China would have been successful long ago, not to mention Africa itself; and liberty is the result of ideology and happenstance. America obtained success despite slavery, not because of it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-15_1143_slavery.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-15_1143_slavery.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, slavery no Tue, 17 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor With more people and more productivity there needs to be more money. Back in the days of gold backing money, 3% more gold a year was mined to approximately match this growth. Even when money was decoupled from gold, the money supply was targeted to grow at 3% a year. In an ideal world, one that existed for decades, things ran relatively smoothly because the math added up but then politicians took the reigns from the economists, and government started printing money connected to no reality. People started getting worried that money wouldn’t be worth anything because the supply was unlimited, hence, Bitcoin appeared. When Bitcoin first came out, there was Bitcoin mining where people could supposedly "mine" Bitcoins by solving mathematical problems on their computers that were designed to increase the number of Bitcoins by 3% a year. With the wimpy computers of the time that worked out but soon people were mining way too many Bitcoins with next-generation hardware, and the mathematical problems had to get ever more complex to limit the growth. Finally, they gave up and arbitrarily said there was enough Bitcoin already to represent all the value in the world and there would be no more unless the value of the world increased. This makes some sense until you consider that there are hundreds of digital currencies like Bitcoin who claim the same thing, none of them back up by anything. People buy Bitcoin to get rich, and if people quit buying it, it would be worthless: a Ponzi scheme so blatant that only time will recognize it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-15_1142_ponzi_economics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-15_1142_ponzi_economics.mp3 2:46 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Bitcoin, economics no Sun, 15 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review more Internet & debate concepts: 1. The vast majority of Internet traffic is bots. 2. A VPN is snake oil. 3. Public Internet became a reality despite public institutions working against it. 4. Wikipedia went from untrusted to trusted back to untrusted. 5. Yelp reviews are the easiest way to assassinate a business. 6. People with a fragile ego shouldn’t debate online. 7. Sometimes it takes a troll to tell the truth. 8. Warring links will destroy any debate. 9. A hypothesis becomes a fact if it’s never proved wrong. 10. The tactics of Oral Illusionists are effective because language is a powerful weapon. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-14_1141_internet__debate_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-14_1141_internet__debate_concepts.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Internet, debate no Fri, 13 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor You must be able to identify your problems & your enemies succinctly with words, which is why torturing the language & redefining words is such an effective tactic, it’s an Oral Illusion that distracts you from what’s happening. The technique works because it takes time for new words with the old definitions to emerge, and during that time activists can exploit people’s preconceptions and inferred knowledge: for example, they say only white people can be racist, so all previously written books, plays, movies, and public discourse that use the word “racist” are henceforth only talking about white people; and since black people have no word for those same actions, they must not be doing them. Consider the Western culture concepts of conscientiousness, punctuality, courtesy, integrity & ambition which provide its citizens a better life than other societies: that’s White Supremacy. Another tactic is to change goals: for example, we are a liberty society where people reap the rewards of their own actions and become unequal because of it, but the goal of egalitarianism is for people to be equal in all things, so if a particular race does not have the same percentage of dog ownership, then owning a dog is racist. Oral Illusion tactics have obviously been very successful. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-14_1140_oral_illusion_tactics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-14_1140_oral_illusion_tactics.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, racism, oral illusion no Wed, 11 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Enlightenment that produced so many liberal concepts, like liberty & free speech, also ushered in the age of science. A scientist starts with an idea, a hypothesis, that might explain an observable phenomena, then determines an experiment that would test that assumption, and if the results match the prediction, the hypothesis is a proven theory and becomes accepted science. A hypothesis doesn’t use the word “probably:” science is a statement of fact not conjecture. However, if an outcome occurs that goes contrary to the theory, even if it is only a 1-in-1000 event, the hypothesis must be edited to include the aberration and tested again, or it becomes invalid: this is the basis of the old misquoted adage “the exception disproves the rule.” But debate is not science, and a statement can be assumed true even if there are examples counter to a generalized hypothesis. This distinction is subtle so it’s often exploited to discredit the generalization: an opponent will cite a single exception to insist the whole concept is false. It’s difficult to tell if those people are being intentionally obstinate, or simply stupid, but they can stymie any further conversation of important social hypotheses. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-14_1139_hypothesis.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-14_1139_hypothesis.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, hypothesis no Mon, 09 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It’s difficult to have any kind of discussion online without getting into a link war, where both sides post links to supposedly authoritative sources that support their position then counter-post additional links from other expert articles, thinking that the most links, or most famous source of a link, wins. The thread usually includes images from the link so that any hand-written message is overshadowed & ignored. It doesn’t take many of these exchanges to determine that link wars are a distraction from the debate and a waste of time. If you're an expert, speak up, but don't stand behind a link and claim you're right because the link says so. People want to hear what you have to say, they want to question your discernment of the issue, not someone they don’t know, and since every article & source is now suspect due to the political bias that has consumed the world, you can only rely on your own ability to identify people who you deem trustworthy though interaction with them alone, free of links: in the end it's their judgment vs. yours anyway. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-14_1138_link_wars.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-14_1138_link_wars.mp3 2:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate, link no Sat, 07 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Trolling online is very entertaining if done correctly, and it can also be used to impart information without being condescending or obsequious. If truth is the basis of a troll, readers come away with new insights while being amused in the process. It’s the kind of thing where you say, “I’m joking” at the end but you’re not really, you just say that to relieve interpersonal tensions. Nobody likes to be told what to do, and most people are embarrassed by compliments, so making conversation online in the form of a troll works to alleviate both. For example, if someone is good at something, it’s uncouth to be viewed as a toady, so compliments are turned into a troll that on the surface seems insulting; i.e. calling them a crude name, but it’s easily discerned as the opposite. Similarly, making a statement that appears to agree with the opposition but is so obviously false that it instead exposes the ridiculousness or hypocrisy; i.e. “Sweden, Norway & Denmark lifted all COVID restrictions because they want to kill people,” or “Unvaxxed doctors & nurses are stupid.” Troll truth is the best truth. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-14_1137_truth__troll.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-14_1137_truth__troll.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, trolling no Thu, 05 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Everybody has a fragile ego, some more than others. It comes from people’s natural inferiority complex: the subliminal sense that they are frauds and that the real achievers can tell. Often their fear is justified in reality which creates extremely fragile egos. However, the real difference is between those who have healthy self-awareness vs. the narcissists who think everything is about them and want control. Healthy people can accept their shortcomings and work to avoid or improve them, but mentally ill people, an ever-growing cohort in these social media times, always focus on anyone & anything but themselves. People who criticize is also a sign of a fragile ego, and of course those same people don’t like to be criticized. To test if you have a fragile ego, consider how you respond when you’re insulted: do you ignore it or do you get baited away from the point under discussion. People who project like to claim I have a fragile ego but I’ve been blocked more, shut down more threads, driven more people off the Internet than anyone I know of: proof that least fragile ego wins. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1136_fragile_ego.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1136_fragile_ego.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, fragile ego, narcissist no Tue, 03 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor I ignore Yelp: in fact, I fastidiously avoid it and its cohorts. I hate the whole idea behind user feedback apps: it gives inordinate power to narcissists & exploiters. I come by this revulsion through personal experience: I have been negatively impacted by reviewer’s comments to such an extent that I could not move forward with what I was trying to do. These people were intent on hurting me for ideological reasons, and that was before Cancel culture: it’s got to be 10X worse now. Yelp also highlights the human weakness for spoilers: 1 bad review out of 3 good ones gets all the credibility, and haters know that. For reasons of evil intent or simply economic advantage, unscrupulous people will sabotage their enemies & competitors. Several cases have actually gone to Civil court because of this exact thing, and the culprits found accountable for their intentional malevolent behavior, but those are very, very few: most review-bombers never suffer one iota of regret for their actions. Not to mention the elephant in that room that people like different things, or take benign issues personally. What does democracy even have to do with restaurant & bar reviews anyway? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1135_yelp.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1135_yelp.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Yelp no Sun, 01 May 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The idea of Wikipedia was a great one: a free online encyclopedia where experts on a topic could explain it and other experts could add to or correct until the description was perfect. It got so good that Wiki links could be cited in professional journals, or at least the references from the Wiki page. The first decade of Wikipedia was indicative of the benefits of worldwide interconnectivity & information sharing: a shining light on a hill. Alas, the days of trusting Wikipedia are gone: it’s now as politically compromised as all media & institutional authorities. One only need read entries on “Proud Boys” or “Donald Trump” to see political biases that cancel any redeeming informational value. Wiki’s excuse for this exploitation is that “anybody can make edits,” as if there were an army on both sides changing and re-changing erroneous entries. The fact is that online resources are predominately Left, and that includes the Wiki moderators. In fact, the co-founder of Wikipedia, Larry Sanger, has publicly stated that he’s embarrassed at the politicization of his brainchild, saying it “has abandoned the neutral point-of-view, and ruining what it was meant to be,” and everybody agrees except the Left. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1134_wikipedia_compromised.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1134_wikipedia_compromised.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Wikipedia no Fri, 29 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Many communities were finagled into giving cable companies monopolies, to the point of denying new competing technologies from entering the market. The cable giants like to exercise their monopoly power by jacking prices and there’s no place for customers to go. The solution is to break those monopolistic deals; let WiFi towers come in and get some competition going. Elon Musk’s Starlink will certainly break open the market. But even without that, users themselves are circumventing the prohibition by setting their personal Internet service so that it can be shared by anyone around, called “hotspots,” and products are emerging that automatically connect across them as people travel: it’s essentially free public Internet with no government intervention. Cities certainly must recognize that connectedness has become an important societal goal: they’ve got to quit being lobbied into inaction because they’ll just be left behind. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1133_public_internet.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1133_public_internet.mp3 2:01 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, public Internet no Wed, 27 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Many YouTube channels rely on advertisers who invoke fear to sell their products: food storage, survival gear, gold, and worst of all: VPNs, Virtual Private Network software that claims to keep your time on the internet anonymos. At least the others sell you something tangible but the VPN folks prey on ignorance. Unless everyone is on a VPN, it’s a farce: your Internet provider can recognize a VPN, and an AI can easily compute the odds of who is using it. They don't have to crack your encrypted data to know what it is; they just have to know it exists and watch where the traffic goes: after a while, an AI will find all your previous history, identify all the people using a VPN at a particular time, and match up to you. It used to be you could use a TOR browser which had anonymous IPs and hide among all the pirate traffic & porn, but government forcing sites to register their IP has really made staying anonymous difficult for average people. When I was in China traveling across country in a truck, nobody knew I existed but every time I fired up a VPN on my laptop, a message popped up on my screen: the Chinese interpreter with us said it warned I would be arrested, and the message included the current location of my truck to prove they meant it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1132_vpn.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1132_vpn.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, VPN no Mon, 25 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor I’ve ran several Internet forums over the past 3 decades, starting with a mailing list back in the Stone Ages. While almost all other Old School forums have switched over to social media platforms, I still fully control my own with a remote server & storage company that I change as prices change or security issues emerge. I don’t even know where the site is currently hosted, but parts of it are in my attic. Over the years my site has been DDOS attacked a number of times, and it’s constantly the target of webcrawlers, a half-dozen or more at any one time: occasionally it gets swarmed by 1000s of crawlers indexing for some new search engine. These are all benign activities that are of little concern but bots actually cause me to close down new sign-ups because I was spending so much time deleting them. There are many, many attempted sign-ups that the CAPTCHA, question, and other techniques keep out but there are a dozen a day that get through: their username is not a construct, they're not blacklisted, the email addresses are not throw-aways, and the IPs are not in known bot territory but I if send email to their addresses asking them to respond they never do. Many sign-ups have Anonymous IPs which I just ignore; the others mostly come from Russia & Ukraine, but also China, Amsterdam, Poland & even a handful coming from the States. These are very well-camouflaged bots, and make me think it’s people who sign-up so that bots can later post ads and run prepared scripts: that’s not why I host a forum. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1131_forum_bots.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-13_1131_forum_bots.mp3 2:38 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, forum, bots no Sat, 23 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review more foreign & military concepts: 1. What happens in foreign countries stays in foreign countries. 2. Brexit isn’t that much different politically than Brentry. 3. Taiwan is on their own if China decides to annex them. 4. The South China Sea isn’t named that by coincidence. 5. Iran is the scapegoat for all problems in the Middle East. 6. Look to Japan to see where the world is headed. 7. The American hegemony was fun while it lasted. 8. Wars may not use bullets but they still use soldiers. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-12_1130_foreign__military_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-12_1130_foreign__military_concepts.mp3 2:10 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, foreign affairs, military no Thu, 21 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor War is not an economic decision: America did not invade Iraq & Afghanistan to save money; Russia did not support its citizens in East Ukraine to increase its wealth; China is not taking the South China Sea because of monetary concerns, and money is certainly not radical Islam's motivation. No, War is caused by escalating tensions that are more emotional than rational, more ideological than pragmatic, and more varied than just national interest. We always focus on the implements of violence, namely men, but how many wars have been won by clever manipulation? By assassination, by alliances, by genocide, by paying of tribute, by sheer oratory. One man has often defeated armies, and just as often, so has the mob. The sword is the last device available to the less intellectually capable. Even the definition of “war” is undergoing a re-imagining: Cyber War, Economic War & Culture Wars are real things; more impactful than any shooting war since WW2. In that since, we’re all soldiers in an all-consuming, never-ending war. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-12_1129_war.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-12_1129_war.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, war no Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Hegemony in trade, law, economy, military, technology, culture, media & globalization is where elite nations make rules that all other countries must follow to avoid political & economic isolation. History has seen some spectacular hegemonic empires: Mesopotamia, Mongol, Roman, British, and as of now, America. American hegemony was literally the last man standing, militarily-wise, after WW2. The sure sign of a hegemony is control of the world’s reserve currency which translates to what is essentially America's tax on the World via our immense National Debt which never has to be paid off: buy our debt or the World burns either from military threat or economic collapse. Since America is the only world power that holds liberty as the primary imperative, the democratic aspect of world organizations like the WHO & UN are constantly in conflict with America’s preferences: they use their equal voting power to demand the U.S. share its bounty among them, often hidden in supposedly humanitarian efforts but actually just self-interest cloaked in sanctimony, but since America is a hegemony, it gets to have its cake & eat it too. Devilish bargain because absolute hegemony corrupts absolutely. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-12_1128_american_hegemony.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-12_1128_american_hegemony.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, hegemony no Sun, 17 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Most Americans don’t know much about other countries but they know Japan, even some of it’s history & culture. For whatever reason, Japan has been world-leading is several areas; most famously its products. This is doubly amazing since Japan’s economy has been flat for decades, and its population is aging and in steep decline. Other countries would allow immigrants from developing nations to fill the labor gap but Japan is too xenophobic so they’re developing robot-replacement workers instead even though it's much more expensive at first. However, with robots there's none of social problems immigrants bring. Japan will probably even allow genetic manipulation and AIs. Japan does have the specter of an all powerful China looming on their doorstep, a country that resents their past humiliating abuse at the hands of Japan. The immediate threat is China’s attempt to annex the South China Sea which is of paramount importance to Japan. China must be very wary of going too far and actually inciting a forceful response from Japan because who knows what futuristic things & beings they’ll be up against? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1127_japan.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1127_japan.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Japan no Fri, 15 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Iran wants to develop nuclear power: why should they even have to ask us? They don't owe us anything: we didn't defeat them in war, and they didn't fly airplanes into buildings, Saudi Arabia did that. Other, worse nations like Pakistan, who harbored Bin Laden, and N. Korea already have The Bomb. The U.S., who invaded & destroyed Iraq for similar made-up reasons, is an unprovoked bully towards Iran: casting them as the instigating villain behind every “terrorist” incident in the Middle East, even the world. The deep-seated hatred of the U.S. towards Iran came about in the late 1970s; before that Iran was America’s puppet-nation in the Middle East, but when they cast off the strings, America never forgot. It’s not even that Iran changed sides, they just became about themselves. However, lingering embarrassments are not enough to explain America’s constant antagonism, which is certainly at the behest of Israel. Why? Is only speculation, especially in this era when America doesn’t even have a coherent foreign policy. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1126_iran.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1126_iran.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Iran no Wed, 13 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The South China Sea is 1.4 million square miles of ocean bounded in the west by Vietnam, the east by Taiwan & Philippines, and in the south by Borneo & Sumatra; most importantly, as its name implies, it is also bounded in the north by China. All of those nations have important interests in the area: fishing, oil & gas exploration, and of benefit to the whole world, a third of all shipping passes through the area. Obviously, that also makes the South China Sea of strategic importance to the U.S., commercial & militarily. The question has become: who is the South China Sea more important to, and what to lengths will they go to procure or defend it? Apparently, that would be China: they are not intimidated by any nation or group of nations, and since their intent is to claim the South China Sea as their own, they simply built artificial islands and armed them, creating an unmoving aircraft carrier: landing strip, submarine base & patrol boat HQ. No amount of complaining on the part of the U.S. is going to convince them to tear down those platforms on their own, and we can't make them. China’s intent is to de facto own the South China Sea by simply waiting until the U.S. is tired of pushing back. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1125_south_china_sea.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1125_south_china_sea.mp3 2:42 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, South China Sea no Mon, 11 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor China had a civil war in the middle of the last century: the Communists won and the Capitalists fled to an island off the coast they called Taiwan. Unlike the American civil war where the winning side occupied the territory of the losers, China didn’t do that 70 years ago because the Capitalist West supported Taiwan. However, in the 1970s president Nixon disavowed Taiwan as a separate nation in exchange for China’s trade. Since then the question of whether the U.S. would defend Taiwan has kept China from invading so China hoped interfering with Taiwan’s elections would cause a reunion without triggering American retaliation, but that hasn’t happened, and China is getting impatient. America’s lack of military resolve over the past few decades combined with a weak American president should be enough for China to act, and they have: occupying the South China Sea; repeatedly invading Taiwan’s airspace with military planes, including bombers; and threatening Taiwan’s political leaders who don’t support reunification. Taiwan is most notable for its microchip manufacturing whose value is almost incalculable, plenty of reason to expect China to implement their ambitions soon, and if they do invade, it’s probable they would be immediately successful. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1124_taiwan.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1124_taiwan.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Taiwan no Sat, 09 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Great Britain was one of the founding members of the European Union and provided a lot of the money to run it. It went on for decades but eventually a slim majority of their people had decided they’d rather have complete sovereignty and the term “Brexit” emerged to identify that feeling. The dividing line between those who wanted to stay or leave was ostensibly autonomy vs. collectivism, the same great schism that divides the political ideals all around the world. This irreconcilability was evidenced by the fact they could come up with no “deal” to separate: there was simply not a way to compromise between these opposing ideologies. But egalitarianism, exemplified by Marxism, is tenacious in its goal that everyone be a Marxist, and continue to push for another Brexit referendum even though 90% of Brexiters are still certain of their choice. However, as these Brexit voters pass on, newly-eligible voters who’ve been steeped in progressive ideals in public school, will become the majority and Brentry will be the next new term. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1123_brexit.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1123_brexit.mp3 2:19 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Brexit no Thu, 07 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Contrary to what most Americans conceive, impactful things happen in other countries too, but Americans can be forgiven their ignorance because of the small, barely noticeable affect of those happenings on our everyday lives. Simple observation suggests that foreign affairs are immaterial: maybe because their management has been impeccable but it’s more likely that anything could happen and it wouldn’t make any difference for very long before the slack is taken up. For example, I know almost nothing of what's happening in China, even while I was visiting there. China’s a big powerful country; we’re told it verges on being the world’s most influential but there’s no evidence of that happening yet? There’s got to be world-changing events going on in China but somehow they don't change my world, at least so far as I notice. It’s a universal observation: for a decade I was basically a recluse traveling, and when I re-emerged it was as if the world had been in a time-warp, nothing happened: the news was the same, just the names were different. It's as if I don't know about something, it didn't occur. Apparently trees that fall in the woods really don't make a sound? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1122_foreign_affairs_are_immaterial.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-11_1122_foreign_affairs_are_immaterial.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, foreign affairs no Tue, 05 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review more healthcare & diet concepts: 1. The actuarial evaluation of COVID is equivalent to the Common Cold. 2. People were prepped for decades to fear The Virus. 3. A cancer cure is finally here. 4. Namibia needs to keep its doctors. 5. Healthcare professionals lost their credibility when they politicized. 6. The High Cholesterol industry is proven quack medicine. 7. Any diet that causes weight loss requires ketosis. 8. What’s natural isn’t necessarily good for you, and vice versa. 9. Foods are processed for cleanliness, safety, convenience & to make them taste better. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-10_1121_healthcare__diet_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-10_1121_healthcare__diet_concepts.mp3 2:19 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, healthcare, diet no Sun, 03 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor If natural foods are unprocessed, that begs the definition of “processed.”According to the USDA, processing food is defined as washing, cleaning, milling, cutting, chopping, heating, pasteurizing, blanching, cooking, canning, freezing, drying, dehydrating, mixing & packaging. That pretty much includes everything but picking it and eating it raw out of your hand. It seems obvious that all foods are processed for good reason: washing & cleaning are simply obvious; mixing foods evenly combine multiple ingredients, and makes them taste better because it changes the molecular arrangement of fatty acids to better fit into the taste receptors on your tongue and the olfactory receptors in your nose; cooking breaks down protein bonds which also makes food taste better, plus easier to chew & digest; milling turns wheat into flour; pasteurizing kills bacteria in milk for safety; drying, canning & freezing allow people to store food; and to not use packaging would defy logic. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-10_1120_processed_foods.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-10_1120_processed_foods.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, processed food no Fri, 01 Apr 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The word “natural” is both mystical and oppositional: that natural foods are better, and that some foods aren’t natural, both of which are categorically false. Contrary to “organic food” which has a legal definition, people can imagine natural food any way they want, though unprocessed, another ambiguous word, is assumed. The simple fact is all food is broken down into sugars, proteins & fats: it’s the sugars, most deriving from carbohydrates, that are the problem, natural or not. Interestingly, table sugar, which is on the natural/unnatural border, is better for you than the sugar in fruit. In fact, squeezed fruit juice is so bad that doctors vehemently recommend not giving it to children, and adults should stay away too. Eating raw fruit, especially berries, is okay in moderation, and even an occasional apple: both of which sound incredibly natural, but natural milk products cause gas & discomfort in a large portion of the population, as does the gluten in wheat. No one would consider a Pop Tart to be natural but it’s not really unhealthy, not like high fructose corn syrup which is natural. And natural has nothing to do with the real problem, which is obesity. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-10_1119_natural_foods.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-10_1119_natural_foods.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, natural food no Wed, 30 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Your body uses 3 energy sources: the primary & most important is glucose, a kind of sugar; it’s so important your body is always making it. Alcohol can also be an energy source and you’ve certainly seen people who survive on it. However, the source of energy people are trying to invoke to lose weight comes from you adipose tissue, your fat. If you’re not getting a lot of glucose in your diet, your body resorts to getting it from your fat, called ketosis, which is where keto diets get their name. Besides losing weight, ketosis has the added benefit of not needing much insulin because insulin is produced by your pancreas to match the amount of glucose in your blood. The side effects of insulin are all bad so the less the better. Careful though because there’s a fine line between losing weight and full ketosis: so much that your breath smells sweet & your urine becomes discolored. If your diet is so strict that all the glucose your body needs has to be internally manufactured, it uses the protein from your muscles to do it. Not only that, all the little stores of glucose in your muscles that give you strength are depleted. Even worse, your brain can’t use any source of energy but glucose, so too low amounts make you lethargic & stupid. That’s why dieting is a science. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1118_keto.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1118_keto.mp3 2:38 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, ketosis, keto no Mon, 28 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor 78 million people are eligible for daily cholesterol-lowering medication and half are taking it. Depending on when & where you went to Medical school, this is a good or bad thing. From being the savior of heart disease in the 70s & 80s, the cholesterol schtick has been exposed this century but like so much quack medicine, it continues on. Here are the facts: • For elderly men and for women of all ages, high cholesterol is associated with a longer lifespan. • As Americans have cut back on saturated fat and cholesterol-rich foods, rates of heart disease have gone up. • In the two most recent trials, involving over 10,000 subjects, cholesterol-lowering did not result in any improvement in outcome. Yet on the flip side, numerous studies have linked low cholesterol with depression, and rates of heart failure have doubled since the advent of cholesterol-reducing statin drugs. Worse, almost a third of statin users experience weakness, muscle wasting, polyneuropathy, cognitive impairment & cancer. Americans are right to mistrust pharmaceutical-driven medicine. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1117_high_cholesterol.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1117_high_cholesterol.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, cholesterol no Sat, 26 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Doctors used to be one of the most respected professions in America: when a doctor or other medical professional said it, people listened; but that credibility has been severely undermined by the Shamdemic. Luckily, most local doctors have stayed out of the fray but the public figures have been so bad and so despicably evoking sanctimony & fear that the whole field of healthcare has been tainted. The segregation of people into “vaxxed” & “unvaxxed,” the ignoring & dismissing what healthcare officials in other countries are doing, the mass firings, the scapegoating, and the blatant politicization that is tearing the nation apart. Factor in the Marxist-lead international health organizations and the egalitarianism of our domestic institutions, and it doesn’t seem like there’s anywhere to go to get unbiased & unadulterated information. There is no longer a wise & trusted organization people can feel comfortable was looking out for their best interests. Healthcare had already descended into a pit of suspicion & complaint but now it’s entered the realm of conspiracy theories & authoritarianism with no foreseeable way out? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1116_healthcare_confidence_crisis.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1116_healthcare_confidence_crisis.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, healthcare no Thu, 24 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Nationalism and Globalism have conflicting priorities but none is more fraught with ideological hubris than healthcare. Nationalism means you look out for your own nation first but Globalism is the free flow of capital among nations, including intellectual capital like doctors. Unfettered emigration leads to poorer nations remaining poor while the rich nations keep their costs down: for example, if Britain needs doctors, they’ve been giving them special enticements to leave their own country and immigrate to Britain instead. Medicine is one of those few professions where the quality is not subject to the nation’s GNP: Namibian doctors are just as smart and just as trained as Western doctors, maybe more so since they can’t rely on expensive medications & equipment. They are exactly the kind of doctors those nations need and should not be lured away by getting “rich.” If Britain needs doctors, they should train them domestically, not cannibalize Namibia’s. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1115_namibian_doctors.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1115_namibian_doctors.mp3 2:08 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, emigration, immigration, doctors no Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Cancer is when a single cell mutates and no longer kills itself. (That's how cells renew, they split then the old one turns off.) As time goes by and this one cell splits but doesn’t go away, then splits again, and again, all creating new immortal cells. Eventually the mass (cancer) destroys everything around it. When one of them gets into your bloodstream, it's all over because those immortal cells will be spread all over your body to create many ever-growing masses. Chemotherapy is a cocktail of drugs that kills all “new” cells but that means noncancerous new cells too: your hair, the cells in your mouth & intestines, your immune system. No wonder people get so sick on Chemo. However, there is a new cancer treatment that is much more strategic: it uses the patient’s own immune system to seek-and-destroy the immortal cells. Doctors biopsy a mutant cancer cell from the patient then use gene-splicing to specifically identify the mutants and only the mutants for destruction. Right now the costs are too high so it’s only used on children but it will be available to everyone in the future. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1114_curing_cancer.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1114_curing_cancer.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, cancer no Sun, 20 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The developed world was ready for The Virus: we’ve had a decade of popular movies & TV shows fantasizing how special people would live because they protected themselves and the profligate would all receive what they deserved. This death cult fantasy fosters extreme authoritarianism, another favorite of the special people, who also seem universally sanctimonious with a complete lack of self-awareness. This constellation of traits can be exploited by those of us with a sense of humor: for example, I told a (former) friend of mine that they can’t visit because I don’t let anyone who’s been vaccinated into our house because the vaccinated can still be carriers; I figured it was a humorous but totally reasonable symmetrical response. With no recognition of the irony, this person made claims about stopping the spread of The Virus by vaccinating people. It gets better: I reminded him that I was a doctor, and if he would submit to an anal swab test at the door, he could come in. Who said The Virus was all bad? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1113_the_virus.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-09_1113_the_virus.mp3 2:11 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, virus, COVID no Fri, 18 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor In 2020, deaths from cold viruses, normally 50-80K people, were less than 1% of that. The obvious reason death from colds was almost zero is because they were all being attributed to COVID, but of course, Covidians said it's because the lockdowns worked? A bizarre logic that implies they worked almost 100% for regular colds & flus, just not on COVID, because those cases supposedly continued to skyrocket. When Sweden, Norway & Denmark removed all COVID restrictions, saying it had no more effect than normal flu, the Covidians claimed they were willing to kill their citizens for commerce. Then when the actuaries started saying that all the deaths attributed to COVID suspiciously coincided with the drop in all other deaths, and that the projected mortality of 2020/21 had not changed due to COVID: in fact it was only the 3rd worst year in the past decade, the die-hard maskers simply claimed it was false information. Covidians also suggest that Asians have a “natural resistance” to COVID to explain why those counties that never locked down showed no ill effects, but didn’t explain why Asians living in the West didn’t have the immunity. It all shows how effective brainwashing is, and how little difference demonstrable facts make. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-08_1112_covid_vs_the_common_cold.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-08_1112_covid_vs_the_common_cold.mp3 2:30 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, COVID, Common Cold no Wed, 16 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review more psychology & morals concepts: 1. Cortisol is the silent killer no one talks about. 2. Adrenaline is the spice of life. 3. Extortion runs the world: stop paying and find out yourself. 4. Life has become kayfabe and no one seems to know. 5. Wisdom lets you recognize how foolish your life has been. 6. The religion of diversity has inserted itself into professional ethics. 7. Morals are subjective so morality can’t be objectively compared. 8. Most people value their life over your liberty. 9. Value 0 is the one value that rules them all. 10. There is nothing more pitiful than an intelligent person making stupid excuses. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-08_1111_psychology__morals_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-08_1111_psychology__morals_concepts.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, psychology, morals no Mon, 14 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Everyone is the center of the universe so, of course, their life takes precedence in most situations, to themselves anyway. Mature members of society make allowances for each other, however, in the case of narcissists, no exception is given for what anybody else thinks, and there’s no doubt that social media is an incubator for narcissism. As justification for this preoccupation with lifex, they insist that it’s mentioned first in “life, liberty & property,” the things The Constitution was written to protect. Since it’s easy to conflate their life with life in general, the misunderstanding gives rise to all kinds of distortions: abortion, war, animal rights, and a host of “safety” issues; and once the argument becomes about “life,” sanctimony smothers the debate. There is no argument that convinces the “my life over your liberty” people. In fact, if you reply that indeed your liberty is more valuable than their life, they are offended beyond any continued discussion, not that it would make a difference anyway. The problems are solved if liberty trumps life because liberty allows for someone to make their own life their top priority; they just can’t extend that preoccupation to imposing restrictions on others: forced vaccinations, for example. Restating the situation: the battle’s not really life vs. liberty in most people’s eyes, it’s their life vs. your liberty. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-03-12_1108_life_vs_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2022-03-12_1108_life_vs_liberty.mp3 2:57 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, life no Sat, 12 Mar 2022 17:40:21 -0800 politics & humor Incompetent people have excuses for everything, but the most annoying are competent people who make excuses so that they don’t have to take a stand, the ones who crave acceptance and are afraid of confrontation. A good example is intelligent commentators who won’t come down on one side or the other about things like Climate Alarmism or the Shamdemic: the excuse they make is that after ascending the ladder of pros & cons, they get to the point where the particularities are above their head, so no judgment is possible, but these are the same people that often pontificate outside their area of expertise by claiming some kind of inherent ability to discern the truth, except on the issues the require them to take uncomfortable positions and make a stand. Essentially, they’re lying cowards, which is inexcusable. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-08_1110_excuses.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-08_1110_excuses.mp3 2:02 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, excuses no Sat, 12 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Values seem like they would be subjective but in an attempt to make them objective, what if they were ranked? Suppose Value 6 is less important than Value 5. A Value hierarchy is obviously fraught with ambiguity: for example, what’s the order of life, liberty & property? Reading the Preamble of the Constitution, in America as it was established, all values are subservient to a fundamental value: liberty, which would be Value 0. Still, our liberty is bounded by responsibility and the liberty of others, so we give up some of our personal liberty in exchange for others giving up some of theirs for us. Unfortunately, the Lockdowns proved that many of America's leaders do not have liberty as Value 0: they seem to be using the socialist ideal of the Greater Good? How did Greater Good become Value 0 for so many people? It’s not in legal doctrine, we had religion for centuries and liberty was still Value 0, so that only leaves public education: socialist indoctrination of a new Value 0 came from the State. And how did that happen? How did politicians swap out Value 0, especially when the judiciary was supposed to be keeping watch on our liberty? Because liberty allows people to choose something else as Value 0 if they want, and democracy made it happen, so democracy has become the real Value 0 and it’s not even mentioned in The Constitution. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-07_1109_value_0.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-07_1109_value_0.mp3 2:53 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, values, democracy no Thu, 10 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Politics is, in essence, others imposing their morality onto you. Liberty, personal autonomy, making decisions for yourself, was supposed to protect us from that exact thing but as more-and-more people actually want to be told what to do, democracy has eroded the liberty paradigm until now publicly-imposed morals are becoming the norm instead. This leads to the question that always haunts collectivism: whose morals? And how do they compare to mine? Is life part of morality? I’m willing to kill to protect my liberty: is that moral? How about truth? Respect? The Ten Commandments? Violence? Masculinity? If someone claims something to be “moral” but another person disagrees, that’s subjective, which is why morals have to come from the ultimate authority: God. This is essentially why morals are limited to religion. The current diversity & inclusion morals are religious, but if they don’t come from God, that leaves only government institutions. Syllogism suggests there is no longer a distinction between Church & State: if morals come from God but morals are coming from the state then that means the state is God. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-07_1107_comparing_morality.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-07_1107_comparing_morality.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, morality no Sun, 06 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Religion was the place so-called “values” came from: presumably God came up with them. They included the Ten Commandments, though those are pretty much ignored in recent times; and there were the Rights enshrined in The Constitution but those are also under intense attack: for example, Free Speech is essential gone. Instead there are new commandments coming from somewhere but certainly not God: now we must pledge to diversity & inclusion, and if we don’t, there goes your professional license. Where did the idea of “diversity” even come from? When did the purview of licensing organizations expand to include religious dogma? Professionals can be censored from practice unless they swear to abide by a subjective standard interpreted by someone else? They also get to tell you how to address them. Notice how what that someone else thinks is abusive behavior has precedence; they get to determine what you say and do, a reversal of responsibility & control, from you to them. You would think lawyers would be the ones confronting this attack on liberty but they were the first to demand allegiance to diversity as part of their Ethics requirements. Instead of God telling us how we should act, a shadowy force in the ethics departments of professional organizations is. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-06_1106_professional_ethics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-06_1106_professional_ethics.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, professional ethics, diversity no Fri, 04 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor After a lifetime of objectively pursuing wisdom: creating a list of knowledge & experience and achieving everything on it; I now feel satisfied that I am indeed wise. However, one of the bad things wisdom brings, which I should have expected but I didn’t yet have enough wisdom to know, is that the person I was before, and all of my past actions, seem embarrassing in retrospect: a hindsight of foolishness. In fact, my memories make me physically cringe; rather than taking pride in my accomplishments, I feel chagrin & shame of the ridiculous & naive antics I participated in, which overshadows my laudable goals: showing that negative feelings & memories are more powerful than positive ones. I would liked to have gained that important bit of wisdom at the beginning of my search rather than at the end so that I could have made the choice to continue or not? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-06_1105_the_dark_side_of_wisdom.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-06_1105_the_dark_side_of_wisdom.mp3 2:09 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wisdom no Wed, 02 Mar 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The word “kayfabe” describes the choreographed showmanship of professional wresting, where the winners are picked beforehand, each contact is scripted & the blood is fake. Kayfabe extends beyond the match itself: the pre & post confrontations, the interviews & even the girlfriends. Fans accept the fakeness of what they’re watching, purposely suspending their disbelief to be entertained: it’s all in fun. Unfortunately, kayfabe has become sinister in another realm; the concept is a very apropos way to describe modern politics: that everything we’re watching is prearranged, every contact is scripted & voting is meaningless. In fact, it’s spread throughout all of society: nothing is real, everything is an illusion: news, medicine, even science. However there is one big difference: the audience isn’t aware it’s kayfabe. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-06_1104_kayfabe.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-06_1104_kayfabe.mp3 2:00 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, kayfabe no Mon, 28 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Extortion is a legal term but colloquially it’s the best word to define what occurs in an authoritarian environment. Extortion is the manifestation of control, and it’s everywhere: family, friends, religion, society. You alone are nothing but sport to bullies so you agree to be extorted in exchange for protection from those stronger than you. However, the people who protect you want something in return and you don’t set their payment, they do. Sometimes it’s a benign government or benevolent business owner whose demands on you are not onerous, but most often both public & private interests extort the public to satisfy greed or grasp for even more control: if you don’t pay you’re taxes, you go to jail; if you don’t sign an ethics pledge, you lose your license; if you don’t get vaccinated, you can’t work here. Extortion is what makes society functional, or more likely, makes it dysfunctional. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-05_1103_extortion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-05_1103_extortion.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, extortion no Sat, 26 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Adrenaline, a hormone created by your aptly-named adrenal glands, makes you smart, creative & energetic. Thrill-seekers risk life & limb just for the adrenaline hit it brings. It’s truly the spice of existence: without adrenaline, life would be boring indeed. We also feel the affects of adrenaline every time our car swerves too much, a dog barks, or an unknown group of people is coming over the horizon: it’s part of our Fight or Flight response that kept the human species alive and engaged. Unfortunately, the advantages of adrenaline are counter-balanced by negative manifestations: people who have too much adrenaline exhibit characteristics and medical conditions that are life-threatening, like anger & alcoholism, and the more insidious ADHD which is the inability to concentrate. There’s also high blood pressure and an increased risk of heart disease. Adrenaline may invigorate you or save your life this instant but increased amounts, especially in the long-term, can blunt your success. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-05_1102_adrenaline.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-05_1102_adrenaline.mp3 2:05 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, adrenaiine no Thu, 24 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Most people are barely aware of the internal chemicals that their bodies use to subconsciously mediate their mood & responses to life’s situations, both positive & negative: the most detrimental being cortisol. Cortisol is part of the Fight or Flight response that allowed humanity to survive in dire situations, and operates admirably in short bursts, but unfortunately the challenges of modern life trigger its production almost continuously. When someone is stressed, their adrenal glands release cortisol into the blood stream where it travels to all parts of the body, over time causing indigestion, weight gain, sugar cravings, acne, restlessness, poor sleep, thirst & decreased immunity; that last being a literal killer. Negative emotions also release cortisol: envy certainly, as do jealously & resentment, and reducing those negative emotions is what motivates people to persistently seek control. Having control over your life is the single most important factor in dampening cortisol production: people become more healthy physically & mentally. Industrialization & urbanization have both increased people’s negative emotions and reduced their control. Online social media & constant news exacerbate the feeling of helplessness even more. Evolution never intended humans to produce so much cortisol. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-05_1101_cortisol.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-11-05_1101_cortisol.mp3 2:30 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, cortisol no Tue, 22 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor We don’t want to review the SHTF concepts but we probably should: 1. Eventually there’ll be so much knowledge that everyone will have to be a scientist. 2. The single most important ingredient for change is complacency. 3. Part of suffering is suffering fools. 4. What you know can corrode your soul. 5. I’m not impressed with anyone but then who is? 6. The only thing worse than working for somebody is working for somebody for free. 7. Masculinity determines the fate of empires. 8. Nobody wants to tell you to grab what you can get but sometimes that’s the best advice. 9. Let the world burn; you can’t do anything to stop it. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1100_shtf_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1100_shtf_concepts.mp3 2:08 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, SHTF no Sun, 20 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Everyone knows that frequent forest fires are healthy because they keep the dead wood from building up, but politics are such that firefighters prevent them anyway. The analogy applies to almost everything: animal populations, cancer, and certainly economics; if every so often there isn’t a clear out, when the reckoning finally does come, it’s too big & destructive to even do anything about. How can anyone plan anything knowing that at anytime everything they build will go up in flames? That’s the state of the world and everybody’s simply waiting for a spark. Many people have switched from optimism to permission; particularly people who used to believe in America’s customs, cultures & traditions. They witnessed during a fraudulent election and puppet president just how bad the dead wood had gotten. At first, they were numb from disbelief but now they’ll cheer the coming economic collapse & societal destruction. When elites take over to benefit themselves, everything is a lie, there’s so much diversity that there’s no longer any societal cohesion, and both halves of the population thinks the other half is stupid & evil, it’s time to let the world burn. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1099_let_the_world_burn.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1099_let_the_world_burn.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, world burn no Fri, 18 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor It’s difficult to play by the rules if everyone else cheats. If you’ve been indoctrinated since youth to truth, justice & the American way, when the opposite is the prevailing game, what do you do? In that environment, honesty is detrimental to your success. Even though it’s difficult because it’s against your nature, you’ve got to grab what you can get because everybody else is. Money is being given away to people who don’t want to work; your vote’s canceled by a nincompoop’s vote and you don’t even know if it’s real? You’re lied to by so-called news, scientists, doctors and government; your kids go to schools where they’re taught exactly the opposite values that you hold; wars are fabricated for the benefit of elites; you are discriminated against because of your race, sex & sexual orientation, and liberty is gone. This isn’t your country any longer: whatever allegiance used to keep you conscientious & trustworthy is excused; it’s time for you to get on the gravy train too, for as long as it lasts anyway. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1098_grab_what_you_can_get.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1098_grab_what_you_can_get.mp3 2:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, gravy train no Wed, 16 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The common theory of empires is that they have a 250 year life-cycle: pioneers, conquest, commerce, affluence, intellect, and decline due to decadence, defined as a rejection of their traditional values. Though the theory makes for interesting reading, it misses the real reason all societies eventually fail: the weak gain control. Currently, democracy is the culprit: there is simply more weak than strong and they vote, but it’s always the case that the empire declines when masculinity declines: loss of ambition, greed & aggression; all aspects of testosterone. When testosterone can't function because of a weakened male dominance hierarchy, boys are never triggered into puberty; they grow up to be man-boys without the evolutionary features of males; they can't find mates or even sex partners; they’re disrespected; they become disgruntled, pessimistic & perverse; their numbers grow and eventually society becomes weak & unproductive. Ultimately the males rebel or more likely the empire is consumed by a rising empire that has not yet deprived their males of masculinity. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1097_fate_of_empires.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1097_fate_of_empires.mp3 2:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, empire, fate of empires, masculinity no Mon, 14 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor You shouldn’t volunteer, especially if you don’t want to, which you probably don’t. People who volunteer voluntarily do it for the dopamine from altruism, serotonin from subservience, or the adrenaline from masochism. It’s even insulting to be asked to volunteer for something because it’s quintessential passive aggression: “Your skills aren’t good enough for financial reward but maybe somebody will take them for free.” Worse, the asker gets to bask in their own virtue for asking. There’s also the egalitarian sanctimony aspect: “You should feel guilty for your success, you owe penance.” Additional insult comes from the fact that, like everything else, to get a volunteer job, you've got to know someone, and if you’re denied, you’ve belittled yourself for nothing. Even if you’re selected, it always ends up with a request for money; "Do you want to be on our Board?" Ultimately, odds are you’re more competent than the people you’ve agreed to take orders from, so you’re enabling bad decisions. Volunteerism is simply another way of handing control of your life over to someone else less qualified. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1096_volunteering.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1096_volunteering.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, volunteer, volunteerism no Sat, 12 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor I know lawyers and I'm not impressed: what’s worse is that lawyers become judges. I know doctors and I'm not impressed: doctors become sanctimonious elitists. I know scientists and I'm not impressed; most are neither creative nor intuitive. Though I know accountants, I don’t know any economists but I don’t know any witches either. From my intimate experience with so many respected professions that turn out to be less than impressive, I suspect all professions are that way because people aren’t very impressive either. On-the-other-hand, why are all the characters in books, television & movies so impressive? The protagonists are more intelligent, charming & handsome than anyone I personally know, and the villains are stupendously cultured, clever & persistent. It’s as if the only impressive people are imaginary, created by writers, but I know writers and I’m not impressed. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1095_im_not_impressed.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1095_im_not_impressed.mp3 2:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, impressive, professions no Thu, 10 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor It’s an age-old question: is it better not to know? Would your relationship be better, would your job be more fulfilling, would your life have more meaning if you knew everything concerning them? The answer is a resounding no! Some things you don’t need and don’t want to hear. Knowing too much about some things is corrosive, so why would knowing too much about things that don’t directly affect you be any different? Most news has no impact on your life: if you didn’t know, it wouldn’t make any difference. The news intends to rile people up and make them angry; newscasters wouldn’t do it that way if their audience didn’t get a perverse pleasure out of it, but perversity is destructive & counterproductive, and you should avoid it at all costs. Conversely, additional knowledge is often extremely enlightening & useful; some things we do want to hear about because they brighten our soul. You’ll know the difference because knowledge worth gaining doesn’t leave corrosion on your soul. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1094_corrosion_on_your_soul.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1094_corrosion_on_your_soul.mp3 2:03 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, news, soul no Tue, 08 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor I have been a political candidate for various offices, placing as high as 2nd for state House and 3rd for U.S. House. There’s little chance I’ll ever win but I’m tired of suffering the fools who can. It’s not just politicians, fools are everywhere, and they’re always in the way of competent people. Sometimes they get there through nepotism, sometimes it’s affirmative action, often it’s momentum, but mostly it’s just because everyone else is a fool from everyone else’s perspective; it’s foolish to think otherwise. Knowing that virtually everyone you deal with is a fool, you’ve got to suspect that you too are a fool, and you wouldn’t be wrong. You can only make decisions from the limited amount of knowledge & experience you possess, and through the lens of your own immaturity; how can that possibly turn out well for the average individual? There are people you read about that don’t seem foolish: Elon Musk for example; until you think about it: that guy wants to change how cars are defined, dig a tunnel from San Francisco to L.A., and land on Mars. What a lot of foolishness... politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1093_suffering_fools.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1093_suffering_fools.mp3 2:03 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, fools no Sun, 06 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor One of the insidious problems with everyone being the center-of-the-universe is a distorted sense of self-satisfaction that leads to complacency. Martin Luther King said, “our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter” but it assumes things matter. In reality, almost nothing in the world affects you, and people eventual realize that expending emotional energy worrying about issues outside their own universe is wasted. Unfortunately, there are people who can hurt you and they know you’re not paying attention. Activists can only be successful in getting things their way if everyone else doesn’t care enough to stop them. Some of this non-reaction is out of courtesy, and some is out of an aversion to violence, and some is out of intimidation, but most of it is simple complacency. No response is the overwhelming default, especially if things are spinning along nicely otherwise. History chronicles this fact over-and-over: for example, the U.S. is being torn apart and most people are too complacent to do anything about it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1092_complacency.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1092_complacency.mp3 2:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, complacency no Fri, 04 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Scientometrics is the measuring & analyzing of science. Since 1947 it’s estimated that knowledge has been steadily growing at 5% a year since the 17th century, meaning scientific data is doubling every 15 years. Obviously, this exponential growth can’t continue forever simply because to continue, everyone on the planet would have to be a scientist to handle their little piece. There’s an ever increasing amount of knowledge, and somebody has to know it. Unfortunately, the number of scientists doesn’t double every 15 years so what will happen? Either people have to get smarter or Artificial Intelligence, A.I., is developed to take up the slack. The border between science and society is becoming increasingly blurred as people ask their gadgets for help & information. The the brain-computer interface will eventually disappear altogether and everyone will have to become cyborgs just to function in everyday life, or the A.I.s take over. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1091_everyone_has_to_be_a_scientist.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-31_1091_everyone_has_to_be_a_scientist.mp3 2:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, science, scientometrics, A.I. no Wed, 02 Feb 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Finance can never get enough review: 1. A psychiatrist could explain economics better than an economist. 2. Imaginary money allows investing for retirement, which is also imaginary. 3. There is so much wealth that it distorts what used to be controlled by markets. 4. Lockdowns don’t affect productivity because those people weren’t productive anyway. 5. Income inequality is good for liberty but wealth inequality is not. 6. When everything is for sale, eventually nothing is. 7. Where does money go when there’s way too much of it? 8. Crypto signals the end of an empire. 9. It’s easy to give financial advice: everybody does it. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1090_financial_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1090_financial_concepts.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, finance no Mon, 31 Jan 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Though it seems reasonable that financial advice is focused on investing money, if you consider the reasons someone wants the advice, the emphasis on money doesn’t make sense. Money is only a means to achieve the things you want to do but you can do those things now with the money you’re told to invest. The simple reason not to postpone your satisfaction & enjoyment to some future date is because that’s predicting the future; one that’s looking more-and-more like an oncoming trainwreck. The best financial advice is to turn imaginary money into something real as soon as possible: remodel your house, start microfarming, gain new experiences, or collect things that please you and will also hold their value. Another good thing to do with money is invest in yourself: get educated, learn a trade, start a business. This spend-now advice is so good that it’s tempting to suggest borrowing money to do it, especially since the coming volatility may make debt a moot obligation, but that’s predicting the future too. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1089_financial_advice.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1089_financial_advice.mp3 2:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, investing, financial advice no Sat, 29 Jan 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor When vast amounts of money are swirling around, people get so frantic, they become irrational: Tulip mania in the 17th century collapsed the Dutch empire, or France’s Mississippi Land Scheme in the 18th century that crashed the French empire. The phenomenon this time around is crypto. Crypto perfectly fits the Ponzi scheme mold, except in its case there's no product: nobody is offering a good or service, and investors are totally dependent on a private entity to deliver on a too-good-to-be-true promise. Plus, it’s easy to deduce that crypto prices fall if there isn't a constant stream of new rubes getting in; and the fact that there are so many fly-by-night crypto providers is also an easy tell; not to mention there’s no where to use it. However, because crypto is supposedly anonymous, it does have some value to contract killers, drug cartels, child traffickers, blood diamonds, and the ever-cryptic tax evasion. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1088_crypto.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1088_crypto.mp3 2:06 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, crypto, Ponzi scheme no Thu, 27 Jan 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The fact that money is imaginary is a hard point to get across because people exchange money every day and it seems real; but anything that appears out of thin air is imaginary: for example, anytime government needs more money to temporarily mask real societal problems, it just imagines it. Every so often, politicians will imagine more money than has ever been imagined before: like now. The question is: where will all that money go? There’s way more money than there are things to buy so bubbles form: for example, the stock market long ago entered an unprecedented upward spiral because retirement funds must show a return to remain solvent, even if it’s imaginary. That’s why most money will simply evaporate, return to imaginary moneyland: a derivative purchased for $1 that went up to $100 goes back to $1. It’s when that money starts consuming tangible things in an attempt to make it real that inflation starts; perhaps hyper-inflation, until the imaginary prices of real things to buy add up to how much imaginary money there is to buy them. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1087_where_will_money_go.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1087_where_will_money_go.mp3 2:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, money, inflation no Tue, 25 Jan 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Even fervent Marxists will agree that in most environments, Capitalism is unequaled in its ability to stimulate economic growth and the social benefits that come from it. The argument socialists have with Capitalism is that it inevitably stratifies & concentrates wealth, but that’s not the most dangerous side-effect... The fatal problem with unregulated Capitalism is that everything is for sale: natural resources, harvests, ports, technology, business, real estate, even military contracts; nothing is off-limits. Communist China exploited this fundamental flaw through the power of "Free" Trade which resulted in them receiving $trillions so they were able to buy up America’s media, entertainment & news, the education system, Venture Capital, and most egregiously, it’s government. Then China decided that America needs to be Communist, and Capitalism was willing to sell liberty too. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1086_everything_is_for_sale.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1086_everything_is_for_sale.mp3 2:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Capitalism, failure, for sale no Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The reason the egalitarians are always prattling on about “income inequality” rather that “wealth inequality” is that the poster-child income inequality nations, such as Sweden and the Netherlands with high taxation on income, have higher wealth inequality than the U.S. In fact, the Netherlands, normally associated with extensive socialism, is the nation with the most wealth inequality. Interestingly, the Netherlands also pioneered Capitalism 4-centuries ago with the Dutch East India Trading company: stock market, limited-liability corporations & insurance; so Capitalism is mature there. How this disparity happened is that the Netherlands is aristocratic, including low inheritance taxes, and dynastic-type estates where only one heir takes all the family fortune into the next generation. Exacerbating the situation, many people have negative equity in their homes because of intentional underwater mortgages to escape the high income taxes. If there was a choice between the two, wealth inequality is arguably worse than income inequality because it inhibits liberty which is based on meritocracy, the opposite of aristocracy. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1085_income_inequality_vs_wealth_inequality.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1085_income_inequality_vs_wealth_inequality.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wealth inequality, income inequality no Fri, 21 Jan 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The world, America specifically, learned that many workers don’t do anything productive enough that it affects the whole economy, especially if the buying power of those people is not diminished. Apparently, millions of restaurant workers don’t provide anything that doing without has the same affect: no servers, no entertainers, no bartenders required, and only enough cooks to meet the diminished demand. Same result for almost all low-tier jobs: no janitors, no attendants, no groomers; though yard maintenance seemed unaffected. The biggest tell is the lack of need for almost all public service workers. Whatever it was they did, which was difficult to discern even before the lockdowns, has been totally exposed as redundant, or possibly even counter-productive. Lockdowns made bare the unpleasant fact that America pays a lot to instill work ethic into its population; tens-of-millions of worthless jobs that might be better left undone except for the social value they bring. All can easily be supplanted by simply handing over free money. This brings up the question of how many workers actually do something? And how many of them can be expected to support everybody else? Is it one-in-ten? One-in-hundred? What percentage of America’s citizens, and non-citizens alike, can stay at home to watch television, play videogames, and sit in their dark bedrooms pretending to be somebody on social media without affecting productivity, as long as the check’s in the mail. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1084_lockdowns_dont_affect_productivity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1084_lockdowns_dont_affect_productivity.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, lockdowns, economy, work ethic no Wed, 19 Jan 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Modern Monetary Theory is the idea that there can be an unlimited supply of imaginary money, so if the stock market needs money, or businesses, or even everybody, then the government can just print it. This concept solves several problems, one of which is wealth redistribution, at least on the surface: if everyone were given a million dollars, average income would increase. But the nature of Capitalism is that wealth concentrates, so all those million dollar checks would eventually end up in the hands of the most wealthy people; trillionaires in the making but nobody’s hurt by wealth inequality in a financial sense if money falls out of the trees. However, there is one distortion of this endless supply of imaginary money that is fatal: when only a few people have so much money that losing hundreds of billions means nothing to them, then Market Forces no longer work. A trillionaire can buy every news organization, every movie studio, support every university endowment, finance every candidate, and do with them as they please because why not? When something imaginary has control over reality, it becomes religion, and whoever speaks to God can tell everyone else what to do. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1083_wealth_distortion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-30_1083_wealth_distortion.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wealth distortion no Mon, 17 Jan 2022 04:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Capitalism has a little discussed side effect, which is the promotion of the illusion of retirees, supported by their “investments” instead of work, with no contemporary productivity. People’s expectations are that they can live the rest of their lives carefree, producing nothing, in a lifestyle they could only dream about when they were working, and expecting everyone else to fill in on their behalf. Retirement literally relies on the old exploiting the young, and that’s considered okay into today's society. This is a new phenomenon, not even a century old; maybe it has been tried before but there aren’t any civilizations that did left to tell. This time, however, it might work if technology keeps ahead of consumption? Maybe with enough investment, everyone can retire? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1082_investing_for_retirement.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1082_investing_for_retirement.mp3 1:47 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, investing, retirement no Sat, 15 Jan 2022 04:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Most of the world is productive, the U.S. exceedingly so; we produce far more than we need, we have for at least a century, and it's increasing. Even if only 10% of the population worked, we could continue along as we are indefinitely. This success is the direct result of Capitalism, but that also leads to individuals accumulating way, way more than they could ever need under any circumstances: what can a billionaire possible do with another billion dollars to improve their quality of life? Inevitably, extremely wealthy dynasties begin catering to their vanity, using their power in sociopathic ways: manipulating elections, subserviating others, and establishing a new world order with them deciding what that is. However, why would 10% of the population work if they didn't have to? How long before the resentment of them working while no one else was cause them to either consider themselves elite or exploited? Without ambition, envy & greed, why would anyone do anything difficult or with a low likelihood of success? And even if no one had to work because of Star Trek-level replicators, transporters & AIs; how long before idleness simply turned into perversity? Idle hands have destructive tendencies. Economics is not a science but psychiatry is. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1081_economics_is_psychiatry.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1081_economics_is_psychiatry.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, economics, Capitalism, sociopath no Thu, 13 Jan 2022 05:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Feminism is a tough review but let’s try anyway: 1. Wokeness is to the U.S. as Christianity was to Rome. 2. Those who are not yet Woke are the Walking Woke. 3. The thing Critical Race Theory lacks is critical thinking. 4. Systemic Racism is racists who don't like the system. 5. Equity takes equality to the logical next level of egalitarianism. 6. Feminism doesn’t care if it ends up emasculating boys. 7. Women are authoritarians because they’re raised that way. 8. The future is female because the males aren’t doing anything about it. 9. Incels won’t stay that way forever... 10. The U.S. is only a failed state from a male pov. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1080_feminist_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1080_feminist_concepts.mp3 2:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, feminism no Tue, 11 Jan 2022 01:00:00 -0800 politics & humor From a male pov, America has become a failed state: government is ineffectual, Capitalism has betrayed them, and the dominance hierarchy is broken. What’s left of their culture, customs & traditions is under attack, and there’s no way to fight back because all the levers of power have been lost. The so-called Patriarchy: liberty, meritocracy & patriotism, are all in steep decline. and the nation seems to be rapidly descending into chaos. However, from the perspective of feminists, minorities & weirdos, America is heading in the right direction because the egalitarian authoritarianism of Communism benefits them. If you’ve been on the losing side then The Enlightenment doesn’t seem so enlightened. Plus, to altruists, a society that focuses on the weak & ineffectual is more satisfying because it takes the pressure off to succeed themselves. This divide between viewing the U.S. as a failed state vs. an imagined utopia will continue until either males rebel, which history shows is unlikely, it’s the women who rebel and men just carry the pitchforks; or utopia is actually reached, at least from a female pov; or chaos. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1079_failed_state.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1079_failed_state.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, failed state, utopia, feminism no Sun, 09 Jan 2022 04:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Due to hookup apps like Tinder, society is back to the top 20% of the guys getting all the girls multiple times, and the rest getting nothing. Because of this, an alarming number of young men, 28% of ages 18-30, are involuntarily celibate, so-called “incels.” It’s not difficult to see why, the majority of males are immature pre-adolescents even into their late teens: their balls never dropped; they have no testosterone; they are essentially girls physically. Being an incel isn’t the male’s fault, it’s been a problem in other societies, and why Mongol hoards rode across the Steppes to conquer mud-hut villages: so they could rape the women. To prevent that, societies enforced monogamy, adopted arranged marriages, discouraged sex before marriage, and there was religious indoctrination to get married. But it’s a female world now and they don’t want to go back to any of that male-dominance stuff. In their world, should they want a baby, there’s lots of test tubes and a catalog of sperm in the freezer. And should by unfortunate chance they have a male baby, they’ll raise that child as an incel too. Unfortunately, in another generation, America will not be able to defend itself against Mongols. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1078_incels.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1078_incels.mp3 2:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, incels no Fri, 07 Jan 2022 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor If society continues going like it’s going, women will completely dominate, just as men did a century ago. During the 50-year transition, men were indoctrinated into believing that what women wanted was equality but women achieved parity with men decades ago, have surpassed them by most metrics, and have no intention of stopping. Women are well past equal in law, medicine, management, entertainment, education, politics, and just about every other status-oriented field. Democrat leadership is dominated by women, and Republicans increasingly so. Republican women side with Democrats on “women’s issues.” Wives will vote for women's interests over their husband's. Feminist slogans should be enough evidence of their intentions: “It’s our turn now,” “Girl power,” “The future is female.” Feminism’s most successful tactic is to constantly reiterate their victim status even with overwhelming evidence of their superiority, the excuse being that making up for the past is one of the goals of equality today. There’s nothing that can stop women’s successful quest for dominance except men who don’t even seem worthy to do so any longer; just ask a woman. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1077_the_future_is_female.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-29_1077_the_future_is_female.mp3 2:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, feminism, women no Wed, 05 Jan 2022 04:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Women see the world through an authoritarian lens where elites know best and expect their subordinates to respond without question. This is because girls are acclimated to authoritarianism from a young age: as children, they are subject to their parents, then they are overshadowed by the physical & leadership superiority of boys in school, then husband; and certainly, women who raise children are authoritarian. It explains why fields that are dominated by women are so authoritarian: education being the prime example, but also medicine, entertainment, and Tech. Plus, women also benefit from the authoritarianism of the state: security, hiring preferences, and special women’s rights. With all of this authoritarian nurturing, women would have to be specifically indoctrinated not to be. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1076_women_are_authoritarians.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1076_women_are_authoritarians.mp3 1:49 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, women, authoritarian, authoritarianism no Mon, 03 Jan 2022 05:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The question of why to remake a famous male-centric movie with female leads is confusing? The prepared answer from the Media is that it makes money but there are so many examples where the result is actually a commercial embarrassment; why not just make original female-centric movies? Because there’s a more sinister reason for the “Jane Wick” movies, at least as viewed from a masculine perspective, the cultural terrorists want to replace male stereotypes and role-models with female ones; they aren’t interested in simply creating their own. It’s an insidious emasculation of boys financed by Communists and the ex-wives of billionaires. The Harvard Business Review frankly states “Women now drive the world economy,” and they are using their power to even the playing field, which essentially means blunting the competitive advantage boys have due to testosterone. Feminists intend to stunt the maturity of boys, leaving them in a perpetual state of puberty before the male dominance hierarchy turns them into men. That means getting rid of masculinity triggers, entertainment being the most visible, but also in school & sports. This plan has already been underway for a generation: one need only compare 18-year boy-men with 18-year old men of past generations. Unless something happens to stop the emasculation, boys will be girls. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1075_emasculation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1075_emasculation.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, emasculation, culture, feminism no Sat, 01 Jan 2022 03:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Equity, also known as equal-pay-for-equal work, hides in the sheep’s clothing of same-pay-for-same-work but is decidedly more insidious and certainly more hypocritical. Equity is the idea that nurses are equal to engineers and should be paid the same. It falls under the egalitarian umbrella: that effort, not outcome, should dictate reward; and that fairness requires giving special consideration to the unfortunate. You can tell how hypocritical these people are because they never argue that pizza delivery drivers: who work just as long as nurses, try just as hard as nurses, and certainly have been unfortunate considering what they do for a living; are equal to nurses and should get paid the same. Apparently, equity only works in the up direction. People who espouse egalitarian ideas, the basis of Marxism, for their own selfish interests don’t even understand their ideology, or perhaps their envy & greed overwhelms their logic because there are no some-people-are-worth-more-than-others in an egalitarian society. To remain consistent with egalitarian ideals where everything is equal, everyone’s pay should be equal, even those who don’t work, and certainly pizza delivery drivers. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1074_equity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1074_equity.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, equity no Thu, 30 Dec 2021 05:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The agitators against Systemic Racism have no interest in ending racism; in fact, they’ve said racism is an unsolvable problem, and by their definition, in every practical way, it is. So-called “Systemic Racism” is Western culture: one based on self-determination, work ethic & conscientious behavior. Without these things, society would fall apart, which leads to a second question: what are they trying to accomplish? Claims of racism, systemic or otherwise, is one of the psyops used by feminists, minorities & weirdos to seize control from people who believe in the values of the west; the so-called “Patriarchy:” defined as liberty, meritocracy & patriotism. How long can any society exist that lets its core tenets be denigrated and called names? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1073_systemic_racism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1073_systemic_racism.mp3 1:51 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, racism, systemic racism no Tue, 28 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor When those that believe government is responsible for you are critiquing those who believe you are responsible for yourself, they use a line of attack called “Critical Theory,” a debate strategy developed in Germany in the 1930s drawing on the ideas of Karl Marx. CRT claims that white supremacy and racial power are maintained primarily via the law, and propose to change the law, including The Constitution, to reflect their equality-based value system. Any complaint about anything perceived as inequitable is attributed to racism. This claim has confused Americans who thought race was essentially skin-color, but the definition of “racism” has been expanded to include any situation, person, or thing that generates an inequality. The CRT solution is to use the law to enforce equality, which can be achieved by giving to the “oppressed” race, or by taking from the “privileged” race. Of course this runs smack into the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which specifically prohibits discrimination based on race, but the majority don’t seem to care, and America does uses voting to decide these things. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1072_critical_race_theory.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1072_critical_race_theory.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, CRT, critical race theory no Sun, 26 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The Covid hysteria took over so completely because there was a generation of Walking Dead TV show watchers primed for it. In the show, zombies who are infected are called the Undead, but the equivalent in real-life are the unWoke. People are infected by hearing Wokeness, which invades their envy, resentment & sanctimony systems, overriding logical thought. The Woke then wander the earth destroying statues that spark their ire and Cancelling any of the unWoke they sniff out and chase down. We who are not infected are the Wokeing Dead, or more aptly, The Walking Woke. Undead characters in the show could hide by wrapping themselves in the entrails of the dead: the equivalent for the unWoke is to wrap ourselves in the platitudes of Wokeness: “White people are racist,” “Systemic Racism,” “White Supremacy,” “Safe Spaces,” and the biggest lie of all: “Diversity.” Though Wokeistanies and Covidians overlap, they’re not the same thing: Covidians are simply frightened weaklings who were cynically herded along by the Wokers. As a fervent watcher of the first 5 seasons of TWD, I know we can’t beat the zombies, we can only wall ourselves off in sanctuaries, and smear ourselves in their offal when we go out among them. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1071_the_walking_woke.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-28_1071_the_walking_woke.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, woke, wokeness no Fri, 24 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Wokeness is a secular religion: rioting in the streets in like attending service, cancelling is hunting witches, and their scripture is the demonization of Western culture. Nietzsche's concept of Slave morality, where the losers in the population adopt values opposite of the winners, is the reason why Christianity overtook the Roman empire; there were simply too many people who considered themselves losers, overwhelming the status quo. Rome found itself in the position of either accepting the new Christian values and lasting another Century before the Goths got them after becoming weak from the inevitable decay that comes from advocating egalitarianism over merit, or going down immediately in righteous Christian wrath. The Reagan revolution, with its emphasis on concentrating wealth, and the NeoCon/Libertarian preferences for a de facto aristocracy, have put the U.S. in the same situation as Rome, with the same outcome: a new faith arose among the lower classes, which creeped upwards into all parts of society because who can resist the unrelenting pressures exerted by the sanctimonious; it's probably evolutionary, and there’s no way to prevent that kind of thinking in a democracy. Just like Christianity, Wokeness is inevitable, and it will last as long as it takes for a new aristocracy to arise. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1070_wokeness_is_the_new_christianity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1070_wokeness_is_the_new_christianity.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Woke, Wokeness, Christianity, Christian no Wed, 22 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Advice needs no review buts let’s review anyway: 1. “Empathy” is a codeword for egalitarianism. 2. The 7 advantages of fame cannot be overstated. 3. Censorship indicates the lack of a logical counter-argument. 4. Gaslighting starts with narrative that someone’s ideas are crazy. 5. Careers are more luck than anything else. 6. You can recognize wisdom by someone’s accomplishments, not their wealth or fame. 7. The Star Trek Enterprise strategy for living is to treat every encounter as if visiting aliens. 8. Most so-called “art” is disliked by the majority of people so don’t be discouraged if people don’t like yours. 9. What makes me unique may seem mundane to you. 10. The goal of your life is to make it better. 11. Just assume that everything you know could be wrong, and you’ll be right. 12. Knowing what other people think of you is external self-awareness. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1069_advice_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1069_advice_concepts.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, advice no Mon, 20 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Self-awareness is understanding you, and external self-awareness is understanding how other people think of you. One way to envision it is to think of one of those pictures of a famous person’s face that when you look closely, it’s actually made up of thousands of different little pictures of that person. The impression someone has of you is formed by which of the little pictures they’ve seen. Unfortunately, the pictures are only 2-dimensional, and they are a snapshot of the past. Also, because of the competitive & egocentric nature of people, others tend to see the least flattering pictures in your collage while you, with the same egotistical bias, see the most: no wonder that how you imagine yourself is not the same as everyone else, and self-awareness is knowing that. The question is, even if you’re externally self-aware enough to know what other people think of you, can you do anything about it? Even if you can, then you’re putting them in control your life. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1068_external_self-awareness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1068_external_self-awareness.mp3 2:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash no Sat, 18 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Science author Jonathan Huie speculated: “Half of everything you were ever taught is wrong; the question is which half.” It’s not a stretch to believe that lots of the things you’ve learned so far, especially decades ago, is wrong. It’s more problematic to put a number on it, certainly something as provocative as “half,” however, there is a convincing theory that almost all knowledge we think we know will be proved wrong in the future; there’s even a calculation that the half-life of truth is 45 years. Among other examples, review showed that only 6 of 53 landmark papers on cancer are reproducible. Add to that confirmation bias: people only listening to facts that support their preexisting notions, and we confront a future of wrongness. Think of it this way: there’s some amount of things you think you know but are outright wrong: whatever the amount, it is not inconsiderable, and unfortunately, you don’t know which is what? Yet people don’t seem to hesitate when they get a chance to pontificate on a subject, usually when they consider themselves an expert in the field. It would probably be better to hold back on certainty if you know you’re going to be wrong so much. There’s so much bad information that falsity is as common as truth, perhaps more-so when intentional lies are added in, which is becoming more-and-more prevalent. What makes it even more confusing is that there’s a 50% chance this whole premise is wrong too. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1067_what_you_know_is_wrong.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1067_what_you_know_is_wrong.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wrong, knowledge no Thu, 16 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Make Your Life Better My life is very full; I have no time for people or things dragging me down. Why spend even 1 second on a cretin when you could give that second to someone you like? This leads to a slew of similar advice: first-and-foremost, don't pursue anything that makes your life worse; don't engage in any discussion, don't have any friends, don't do any job that doesn't make your life better, or at least breaks even. When I was younger, I would allow more break even situations. In fact, most of my interactions were of the more-good-than-bad variety, and if the good was good enough, I'd endure a lot of bad; but now, I don't allow much bad, hardly any. Depending where you are in your life, you may be willing to absorb quite a bit of bad, but make sure it doesn't make your life worse. The ultimate rule is: does this make my life better? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1066_make_your_life_better.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1066_make_your_life_better.mp3 1:58 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, life, advice no Tue, 14 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor I’ve determined I have a different value system than other people: I think being the only-ever simultaneously licensed doctor, lawyer, accountant & engineer is the most impressive thing in the world; more than entertainers, more than athletes, more than billionaires (though Elon Musk comes close). I wonder which of the things I do are unique enough to skew my outlook? First there’s the things I don’t: • I don’t watch sports • I don’t read fiction • I don’t play games • I don’t gamble • I don’t belong to clubs • I don’t want to have the best • I don’t lie Then there’s the things I do: • I like to decorate my life with whimsical things • I like to do everything myself • I want to try everything • I’ll work on something whether anybody else likes it or not • I talk, dress & dance eccentrically, and • I think being a Renaissance Myn is the ultimate achievement politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1065_whats_unique.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-27_1065_whats_unique.mp3 1:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, unique, Renaissance no Sun, 12 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Why is the Mona Lisa considered one of the best paintings in the world? You’ve seen it: unattractive portrait with no expression in muted colors. It didn’t used to be considered exceptional, what happened? Turns out, at the beginning of the 20th Century, when newspapers were just getting color, it and some other undisplayed paintings were stolen. It was the only one that had features large enough for the low-resolution and limited palette, so it was printed over-and-over on the front pages of newspapers for multiple years, including when it was recovered. The Mono Lisa isn’t good, it’s famous, and fame is almost always confused for accomplished. Similarly for a melody you’ve heard a thousand times; it’s familiar, and it or another melody that subconsciously reminds you of it, seems good to you. In the art world, it’s better to be famous than good. The so-called Art critics know this better than anyone, and they decide what’s “good” art. Sometimes, they play with their power, promoting objectively bad art into stardom. In a manipulative world, success has little or no reflection of the artist’s true talent & skill. Art is the very definition of subjective, making the concept personal: for example, I dislike 99% of all books, music & movies, so reversing that, I would expect only 1 in 100 people to like what I create but it’s still good to me. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1064_what_is_good_art.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1064_what_is_good_art.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, art, good art, fame, Mono Lisa no Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Star Trek started as a show with the theme: “To seek out new life, and new civilizations. To boldly go where no man has gone before.” A handful of reoccurring crew members of the Star Ship Enterprise would travel the universe, going from galaxy to galaxy, experiencing strange new things every week, then wrap it up in an hour, and good luck next episode: no baggage, no continuing storylines, nor troublesome ancillary characters. Places also disappeared when no longer needed as a plot device. Remarkably, in a microcosm, you can use this same strategy for your own life. World, continent, state, community, even a Walmart, has become the equivalent of the universe for the Star Trek Enterprise strategy. Most people out there are aliens: they dress differently, have different values, even different logic; you can’t really interact with someone in a mask who thinks magically, and has goals that often perversely interfere with your own. Just listen to the conversations around you: half the time it’s in a different language, and if you can recognize English, nobody is saying anything you even begin to comprehend. Instead, you should view a shopping experience as beaming down. For example, humans will totally ignore you during a single visit to a restaurant, but if you begin to frequent the place, you risk becoming entangled. This strategy extends to all life’s experiences: you plan your arrival to be as unobtrusive as possible, accomplish the task you had in mind while avoiding local interaction then escape back to the Enterprise to prepare for next week’s mission; and certainly don’t bring any aliens back with you. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1063_star_trek_enterprise_strategy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1063_star_trek_enterprise_strategy.mp3 2:50 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, star trek, strategy, life no Wed, 08 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Advice & recommendations come from all directions by people claiming to be experts. There is so much of it, and it’s so often conflicting, that people don’t know who to believe. It would be better if there was some way to tell if a person giving you advice was truly competent & qualified. Wealth is not an accurate measure of wisdom because it basically falls from trees, so you must use other indicators of good judgment. Assume the person follows their own advice, and see how it turned out for them: goals achieved, things accomplished, places gone. The old biblical observation, “by their fruits ye shall know them.” Ignore anyone’s advice or opinion who’s own life leaves something to be desired, whose homes are a mess, have done nothing and been nowhere. Of course, as logical as that seems, most people instead still use wealth & fame as the measure of validity; so-much-so that fame-worship consumes all the credibility, leaving little room for truth; the opposite actually because famous-wealthy people have an inflated sense of their own importance after being treated as elites for so long. That’s why it’s better to keep your own counsel in most occasions. However, should you come across a highly accomplished & experienced individual who’s life is totally in order, they probably have some wisdom. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1062_recognizing_wisdom.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1062_recognizing_wisdom.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wisdom, advice no Mon, 06 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Life isn’t fate, and it isn’t merit, it’s primarily luck: the odds against you even being here far outweigh the number of atoms in the universe. Your life is similarly long odds if you consider how many events had to occur for you to be the person you are today. The myth that you can plan what you’re going to do in the future is a delusion, akin to thinking you’ll be able to pay your rent every month with lottery ticket winnings. The most familiar example of how luck dictates your life is your career: either 10,000 people could do the same job but only 1 gets it, a situation many of us are familiar with; or only 1 person could do the job but it took 10,000 lucky breaks for that to happen; examples are Teddy Roosevelt, Steve Jobs & Elon Musk. The most bizarre aspect of jobs is that many are actually counter-productive: it would be better if no one did them; how lucky is that? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1061_lucky_careers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1061_lucky_careers.mp3 1:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, luck, career no Sat, 04 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Logic is the most powerful debating tool. Unfortunately, many people can’t recognize an illogical argument unless it’s pointed out to them so the logical thing to do for people proposing illogical arguments is to silence logic. Worse, many people are forced to be illogical because logic would frustrate their goals: for example, if logic dictates that someone else should be in charge, or the facts logically support another position; illogic will have to be deployed. Here’s a contemporary example of the tactic: social justice, as defined by American moral & political philosopher, John Rawls, can be rationally derived, making the concept of social justice logical. But logic does not support the ulterior motives of social justice advocates so they developed “critical” social justice, which has the same rhetoric as social justice but cannot be rationally derived, and is therefore illogical. When illogic gets the desired result, logic has to be censored. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1060_why_do_they_censor.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1060_why_do_they_censor.mp3 2:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, censor, censorship, illogic, logic no Thu, 02 Dec 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor A term that has come out of obscurity but works well to precisely define a debating fallacy is “gaslighting.” Gaslighting’s most common display is when somebody starts a sentence with “you’re crazy…” In that exact sense, gaslighting is an attempt to cast someone else as mentally impaired so that their desires & opinions mean nothing because their judgment is suspect and can be dismissed out of hand. However, gaslighting’s definition has expanded to include any assumption of false fact, a kind of straw-manning but it doesn’t require any prep: “you’re a conspirator,” “you’re being paranoid,” “you always scream at me.” Gaslighting is another name-calling tactic used by the Left to undermine & debase people rather than arguments: “you’re racist,” “you’re a misogynist” or “you’re transphobic.” Getting gaslighted effectively frames the debate against you, if you let it: once you go on the defensive, you’ve lost. Your response shouldn’t be denial or defense, it’s to counter-attack: “stop gaslighting!” Reverse -gaslighting works just as well. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1059_gaslighting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-26_1059_gaslighting.mp3 2:13 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, gaslighting no Tue, 30 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Everybody wants to be famous, or they should because fame brings benefits like nothing else does: 1. Opportunity: famous people are offered things that no one else is, especially privilege. 2. Credibility: when a famous person talks, whether or not they’re experts, people listen. 3. Sincerity: money doesn’t underlie the relationships famous people have; being associated with a famous person is enough for their friends & confederates. 4. Platform: fame brings an audience to hear whatever it is they have to say about food, politics, sex, etc. 5. Legitimacy: once a person achieves fame, whatever else they’ve done in their lives is also canonized. 6. Admiration: people look up to the famous, including bragging rights for family, and 7. Election: famous people can gain public office because name recognition in king in politics. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1058_the_7_advantages_of_fame.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1058_the_7_advantages_of_fame.mp3 2:04 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, fame, famous no Sun, 28 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let’s review some of the concepts surrounding philosophy & psychology: 1. “Narcissist” is what a loser calls a winner. 2. Everyone has an inferiority complex because everyone suspects they’re a fraud. 3. Skeptics can never be convinced, and cynics don’t much like people. 4. The philosophies of Existentialism, Absurdism & Nihilism are measurements of optimism. 5. Reductionism underlies liberty. 6. Populism is the rejection of elites. 7. The science of The Bell Curve is undeniable but it politically radioactive. 8. Irreducible Complexity proves evolution is as mystical as creationism. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1056_philosophy_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1056_philosophy_concepts.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy no Fri, 26 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Egalitarians have goals almost entirely opposite the pursuit of liberty: equality vs. merit, responsibility for others vs. being responsible for yourself, and decisions are made by elites vs. making your own. They also have an opposite value set, which can be easily identified by words like “happiness,” “equity” & “empathy:” feelings over facts. Empathy is by far the worst because it reverses responsibility: it’s up to you to show more empathy and only others can tell you if it’s enough; as compared to sympathy, where you make the determination whether or not you want to be sympathetic. Similarly, being compassionate is deciding to help but it’s still up to you, whereas empathy has an expectation that you must help: from each according to their ability, to each according to their need. The egalitarians have been very successful in pushing the empathy narrative: it’s the focus of healthcare, social services and now politics: a president can be despised, given no respect, treated as an enemy, if he doesn’t show the proper amount of empathy, as determined by the hive-mind. Police are even expected to show empathy: putting criminals in charge. Empathy is a brutal club used to beat conscientious, non-confrontational, liberty-minded people into submission; it works because it’s an ugly distortion of traditional religious teachings. It’s not a coincidence that the word “empathy” was coined around the same time as Communism started to take hold of the world. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1057_empathy_last.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1057_empathy_last.mp3 2:50 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, empathy no Wed, 24 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Evolution has become a religion ensconced in the trappings of science. Even though there are glaring inconsistencies, it’s adherents vociferously defend every hill and dismiss anyone who dares question the orthodoxy as a heretic. One need not be a theist to reject some of the tenets of evolution, but those who believe in God did provide the concept of Irreducible Complexity that pushes back against the established narrative taught uncritically in public schools. Irreducible Complexity is the idea that some things in nature are too complex to have evolved because no less complex system would function. It’s not a new concept: the Watchmakers allegory was used for centuries to prove God’s existence, citing the eye as an example of Irreducible Complexity; with modern cites of the Bombardier beetle’s defense mechanism, cilium motion, flagella, the immune system, and blood-clotting cascade. Unfortunately this strategy to disembowel evolution has been undermined by lack of mathematical certainty. Evolution proponents claim computer simulations show that evolution is possible no matter how complex, then they cross their arms and consider the issue closed. However, that same smug computer simulation example is easily turned against them: due to the von Neumann architecture inherent in ribosomes, the cell’s protein manufacturing organelle, it can be easily calculated that the odds of hemoglobin existing, though theoretically possible, is more than 20 to the 146th power, meaning the odds against it evolving is significantly greater than the number of atoms in the universe: essentially a kill-shot on evolution. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1055_irreducible_complexity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1055_irreducible_complexity.mp3 2:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Irreducible Complexity no Mon, 22 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Egalitarianism, the idea that all people are equal, appeals to those who are measurably not equal, and in a society that rewards inequality, that makes the stakes the highest possible, meaning any science that supports inequality must be demonized. This is what happened to the notorious 1994 book “The Bell Curve” which argues using irrefutable data & scientific analysis that intelligence is the best predictor of outcome; essential it proves nature, not nurture, is the true source of social division in the U.S. The book establishes the following facts: 1. Human beings have different cognitive abilities. 2. Cognitive ability is substantially inherited: (40-80%). 3. IQ tests are an accurate way to measure cognitive ability. 4. IQ scores are relatively stable throughout life. 5. IQ tests are not biased against social, economic, ethnic, or racial groups. The specious argument against The Bell Curve concept is to conflate individuals with groups. Bell Curve data requires huge numbers to be predictive, and doesn’t apply to individuals. On a racially-segregate IQ Bell Curve, the average white is higher than the average black, and the average Asian is higher than the average white, but all of those people, white or black or anything else, match up IQ-wise everywhere along the curve except at the very tail ends. If society would simply address those outliers, the other 95% of people could move along as intellectual equals, but apparently everyone worries they are an outlier because feeling inferior is also a basic human trait. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1054_the_bell_curve.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1054_the_bell_curve.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, the bell curve, IQ no Sat, 20 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Populism is anti-elitism, and it’s trending around the world. Populism, by its very nature, lies outside of politics and is antithetical towards democracy, though it also relies on numbers. Populists think a group of people who consider themselves special, and run everything for their own benefit, must be overthrown. Populists accuse the political, economic, cultural, and media establishment of placing their own interests, and the interests of large corporations, foreign countries & immigrants, above the interests of "the people.” Because populism rejects the idea of someone telling them what to do, it’s compatible with liberty, which makes the two groups allies on that point. For their part, elites apply the term “populism” to any movement outside the political mainstream, and try to discredit populism by conflating it with demagoguery, particularly Fascism, but also describing populism as “far left,” “far right,” or “extremist.” Since most politicians, scholars & intellectuals consider themselves elites, they want the term “populism” to be abandoned, stop being used in public discourse, but ignoring them won’t make the elite-hating masses go away. In fact, the 2017 Cambridge Dictionary declared “populism” Word of the Year. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1053_populism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1053_populism.mp3 2:24 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, populism no Thu, 18 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Reductionism is the idea that complex things can be described in terms of simpler parts; mathematics is the premiere example; all math reduces down to the simplest concepts that can describe immense complexity. Science also attempts to reduce explanations to the smallest possible entities: forces, molecules, cells, and the even more reduced components of those. Computer science is wholly based on Reductionism because of its precise & unambiguous mathematical formalizations: Theory Reductionism, Computability Theory, and Turing Reduction. If you believe that computers will one day be indistinguishable from humans then you have tacitly agreed to Reductionism’s premise. Even behavioral sciences, notorious for fuzzy, unproven logic, could become genuine science if based on Reductionist biology like brain chemistry to explain human emotions. The Enlightenment was a result of Reductionism, culminating in the concept of personal liberty, where individuals make decisions for themselves without regard to fate or supreme beings. The idea was so revolutionary that many of the philosophers of that age tried to deny it because God, morals, and all the other hand-waving metaphysics still predominated at the time. They also found it difficult to jettison the Aristotelian belief that “the whole is more than the sum of its parts.” Unfortunately, Socialism also relies on a reductionist philosophy of "most good to the most people,” and egalitarianism too: “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need.” Once a philosophy is grounded in Reductionism, if the fundamental premise can be supported, so can everything else. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-24_1052_reductionism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-24_1052_reductionism.mp3 2:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Reductionism no Tue, 16 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Most philosophies have little bearing on life, more sophistry than useful, while others don’t even try but simply state life has no meaning: Existentialism, Absurdism & Nihilism being the most well known of those. Existentialists, of which there were many proponents in the 20th century like Soren Kierkegaard, Martin Heidegger & Jean-Paul Sartre, suggest people can construct their own meanings through self-awareness, responsibility & free will, all rhetorical concepts. Absurdists, like Albert Camus, don’t want people to try and find meaning but instead simply embrace it; and Nihilists argue that it’s pointless to even do that because life is meaningless: that’s from Friedrich Nietzsche. The problem with existentialism is that it’s very subjective, and tends to devolve into dogma where everyone must have the same values. Absurdism is basically fate except it’s not God’s will but chaos that determines outcomes, which relieves feelings of guilt or failure for people wallowing in either; acceptance would indeed be the better alternative. There’s no place to go from Nihilism since there’s no room for optimism or hope; it seems like it would have few adherents because anyone adopting it wouldn’t be around long enough to propagate. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-24_1051_existentialism__absurdism__nihilism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-24_1051_existentialism__absurdism__nihilism.mp3 2:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Existentialism, Absurdism, Nihilism no Sun, 14 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor It’s curious that so many interesting philosophies originated with the Greeks: Socrates, Plato & Aristotle being the most notable, but just as important are the Skeptics & Cynics. Skepticism began with Xenophanes in the 6th Century BC, who asserted that no truth is knowable, but of course it is. Skeptics argue that the scientific method is not trustworthy because the number of cases tested is always limited and based on the perceptions of the experimenter, but that’s addressed in the scientific method. Cynicism appeared in the 4th Century BC. Cynics rejected traditional social & political views. They espoused a cosmopolitan utopia where the purpose of life is to live naturally, gaining happiness through austerity, rigorous training and rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, fame & possessions. Diogenes, its best known adherent: living as a pauper: sleeping on the ground, begging for food, and outspoken that everyone should adopt his way of life. By those definitions, a skeptic is a person who endlessly demands evidence that a claim is true while never accepting it as proof enough; while a cynic believes that human motivation is selfish in nature, and that people’s actions are solely predicated on personal gain. Neither of these two philosophies appeal to modern sensibilities which explains their lack of notoriety, but the Greeks got it right: skepticism & cynicism fully explain people's frustration, disillusionment, and distrust of organizations, institutions & authority. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-24_1050_skepticism__cynicism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-24_1050_skepticism__cynicism.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Skepticism, Cynicism no Fri, 12 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Because the world is connected, everyone compares themselves to the very best, so it seems like lots of people are superior to you at everything. People have internalized that they are losers, and social media has greatly amplified that feeling, resulting in a deeply-felt sense of self-doubt. Even exceptional people aren’t winners in their own minds, nor do they think they ever can be because deep down, individuals know that there are many other people who could be them except for chance. Entertainers especially understand how much luck played a part in what they are and what they have, so they give each other made-up awards as a means of reassurance. Even though people who earned their rewards through accomplishment & conscientious behavior are less susceptible, everyone suspects they are inferior; it’s a drag on their self-esteem, and an open wound to poke sticks into. A very successful debate tactic against people whose arguments depend on personal credibility is to imply they are frauds: that anything they’ve achieved was luck, and that their expertise is illusionary. It’s the one accusation that will undermine the confidence of anyone, no matter how famous and successful they are, because it triggers their inferiority complex. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-24_1049_inferiority_complex.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-24_1049_inferiority_complex.mp3 2:13 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, inferiority complex no Wed, 10 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor “Narcissism” is one of those words thrown around by envious people to insult high self-esteem people. Unfortunately, even though there’s a psychiatric definition, it’s so vague that it could be interpreted to classify anyone into Narcissistic Personality Disorder: • Grandiose self-importance. • Fantasies of infinite success, control, brilliance, beauty, or idyllic love. • Thoughts of being extraordinary & exceptional. • A desire for admiration. Those are symptoms of euphoria which everybody does and should experience occasionally. Criteria as general as those are useless. People who actually have lived around a narcissist are the best diagnosticians, and their list of symptoms is much more specific: • Feel superior & entitled. • Exaggerated need for attention & validation. • Perfectionism. • Great need for control. • Lack of responsibility: blaming & deflecting. • Lack of boundaries: cajoling, demanding, rejecting & pouting to get what they want. • Emotional reasoning that places their desires first. • Take credit for the good and blame the bad on others. The most concerning thing about true narcissists is that they are incapable of changing. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1048_narcissistic_personality_disorder.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-25_1048_narcissistic_personality_disorder.mp3 2:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, narcissism, narcissistic personality disorder no Mon, 08 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let’s review the differences between liberty & Fascism: 1. Most people don’t know that liberty was a result of The Enlightenment in the 18th century. 2. When we lost liberty, we lost what it meant to be an American. 3. Liberty was defeated by democracy; specifically women. 4. Letting go of liberty will only be difficult for the people who remember it. 5. Post liberty is authoritarianism. 6. Democracy was always liberty’s greatest threat. 7. American “liberty” differs from European “liberty” because people are responsible for their actions. 8. Without propaganda & indoctrination, liberty can’t exist. 9. It used to be liberty was protected in the courts by “strict scrutiny.” 10. Neocons are Fascists because it’s comprised of authoritarian private elites. 11. Anarchists are Fascists because the strongest wins out. 12. Fascists patiently bided their time just like the Communists for the Cold War to end. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-24_1047_liberty_vs_fascism_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-24_1047_liberty_vs_fascism_concepts.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, Fascism no Sat, 06 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It’s become recognized that after the fall of the Soviet Union, Marxism in America was given free reign because it was no longer suppressed by State propaganda. What isn’t as well known is: so was Fascism. America has always had a high percentage of pre-Enlightenment thinking; never more than half of Americans truly believed in liberty, or even knew what it was, and that was with indoctrination in public institutions like schools, government & churches. Many people simply prefer to be told what to do by elites; they revel in authoritarianism, the hallmark of Fascism. Before WWII, when Fascism was in full bloom in Europe, it also found quite a following in America: William Randolph Hearst, Joseph Kennedy (JFK's father), Charles Lindbergh, John Rockefeller, Andrew Mellon (Secretary of Treasury), DuPont, General Motors, Standard Oil, Ford, ITT, Allen Dulles (head of the CIA), Prescott Bush (the Bush clan patriarch who made his fortune via oil contracts with the Nazis which financed two Bush presidencies), National City Bank, J.P. Morgan, Coca-Cola, IBM, Singer, Goodrich, Gillette, General Electric, and many ordinary Americans were fervent Fascists, some even Nazis. It’s difficult to find out just how prevalent Fascism was in America because its supporters always claimed to be anti-Communist, and that was enough for the time. Fascism was not seen to be a threat and it’s bigger than ever, just as Marxism is bigger than ever; and liberty, the foundation of U.S. Constitutional government, where people make decisions for themselves, the opposite of authoritarianism; liberty doesn’t seem to have many followers. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1046_patient_fascists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1046_patient_fascists.mp3 2:58 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Fascism no Thu, 04 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The whole idea of anarchy is fundamentally flawed because those on the anarchy side believe they live in a fantasy world that can ignore bad people. As the drift towards Communism has gotten more pronounced, the backlash has emboldened the anarchists, and some, like Michael Malice, are starting to get famous but they never get past that basic flaw; they must have holes in their brain where logic used to be: they don’t seem concerned that the first time the lights go out and the cops stop showing up, some guy and his well-armed cousins are going to show up at Michael’s house to kill him, rape his wife & eat his kids. It took some circular debate but I finally understand why anarchists aren’t concerned about their safety: it’s not all authority they reject, just government authority: they’re fine with private elites using their power to protect him. It’s apparently the way other anarchists feel: they don’t have a problem with aristocracy nor concentration of wealth or power; they if a company makes demands on employees that infringe their liberty, anarchists say the employee can quit; and anarchists certainly aren’t fans of democracy. In essence, calling yourself an anarchist is just a sneaky way of saying you’re a Fascist. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1045_anarchists_are_fascists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1045_anarchists_are_fascists.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, anarchy, anarchists, Fascists, Fascism no Tue, 02 Nov 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Socialism perforce requires authoritarianism to tell people what to do. Because of this, Fascism, which also requires authoritarianism, is often compared to socialism, but there is a distinctive difference: socialism is public elites, the State, doing the telling; while Fascism is private elites, corporations, in charge, so private elites telling you what to do is the simplest definition of Fascism. An examination of the Republican party’s ideology of Capitalism, anti-taxes, especially inheritance taxes, and enforced morals dictated by church or business, points at their Fascist tendencies, however most Conservatives are live-and-let-live at heart, the liberty ideal, which opposes authoritarianism. Unfortunately, NeoCons, or new Conservatives, are definitely Fascists: crony-Capitalists with global ambitions and dreams of a reborn aristocracy. NeoCons are so steeped in elitism, they can’t even have a debate because they consider their opinions superior to everyone else’s. This is common among ideologues but NeoCons have the self-assuredness that comes from going to the right schools, belonging to the right clubs, and knowing the right people: they are the elite of the elites, the Fascyist of the Fascists. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1044_neocons_are_fascists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1044_neocons_are_fascists.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, NeoCons, Fascists. Fascism no Sun, 31 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor When a federal judge considers an issue that infringes liberty, they categorize the impact as either “rational basis,” “intermediate scrutiny,” or “strict scrutiny.” The law or policy must be necessary to achieve a "compelling state interest" and "narrowly tailored" to achieve the “compelling purpose,” and uses the "least restrictive means” to achieve the purpose. At the rational review level, this hurdle is relatively easily met and upheld in the liberty vs. socialism sacrifice. However, as the impact on liberty increases, the bar increases, and at the extremes, severe restraints on personal liberty must pass strict scrutiny. Unfortunately, as America has become more socialistic and authoritarian, personal liberty has rapidly degraded by lawmakers & courts ignoring the strict scrutiny rule: lockdowns, national guard in the Capitol, censorship, etc. Liberty should only be circumscribed after rigorous consideration, and be periodically reviewed to see if the infringement should be removed. No other country is based on liberty so they didn't even question this most important aspect of the lockdowns, but the U.S. was supposed to have liberty as its #1 concern. Whether people die of Covid is not the issue, the issue is proscribed liberty: unable to pursue their careers, travel prohibited, forced to wear masks. We are being asked to sacrifice our liberty for undoubtedly questionable motives. Maybe at first, especially with wildly over-exaggerated claims, authorities were granted lots of leeway, but that was quickly over: ultimately, the Shamdemic was mostly lies for ulterior machinations we can only guess at: political power-mongering, Climate Alarmists taking the opportunity to shutdown progress, negative Chinese intentions, or simply plain incompetence. The reason makes no difference, without strict scrutiny, now Americans are conditioned to sacrifice their liberty anytime elites tell them too. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1043_strict_scrutiny.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1043_strict_scrutiny.mp3 3:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, strict scrutiny no Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Just a couple of generations ago, all school children, no matter their age, put their hand over their heart, faced the American flag and recited the Pledge of Allegiance, which guarantees “liberty for all,” every morning. Back then, all teenagers had to memorize the preamble of the Constitution in their Civics class, ending in the goal to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity,” which establishes liberty as America’s foundation. Students were also taught about personal responsibility, an integral component of American liberty. in their homes, school & church. As a nation, we established these customs because liberty is not the natural human condition while authoritarianism is. Liberty expects people to make decisions for themselves, not wait for elites to tell them what to do, which is rare in human history; possibly only America ever experienced it. Without propaganda; without indoctrination of children, without knowing the Pledge & Preamble to instill it in our youth, liberty cannot continue or even exist; which if you look at today’s education curriculum, explains its demise. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1042_instilling_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1042_instilling_liberty.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The word “liberty” get bandied about a lot with different definitions: some cynical, many distorted, but most are confused, particularly the distinction between the American and European concepts of the word. American liberty differs from European liberty in four major repects: • First, American liberty defaults to the individual over the group, but European liberty is the needs of the group supersede the wants of the individual. • Second, in America, Rights are negative, meaning some things like Speech and guns, can’t be taken away, but with European liberty, Rights are positive, meaning people are owed: inclusiveness, welfare, “happiness.” • Thirdly, American liberty also includes the idea of personal responsibility: reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of your actions; while European liberty is egalitarian: from each according to their ability, to each according to their need. • Lastly, European liberty requires authoritarianism to ensure equality, but American liberty is anti-authoritarian. Unfortunately, American liberty is being lost because European liberty is what’s now taught in public schools. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1041_american_vs_european_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-23_1041_american_vs_european_liberty.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, American liberty, European liberty no Mon, 25 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor In the history of American democracy; first, it was only men with property who could vote, and that worked out for liberty. Then there was a popular uprising in the early nineteenth century and voting was expanded to all free men, and that worked for liberty too, for awhile until there was a civil war, after which all men were enfranchised, and that kept working. In fact, liberty thrived in America, and though opportunity was unequally distributed, it was nonetheless successful for those who got some. Liberty was even buoyed after suffrage, and was still healthy with an Amendment to the Constitution in the second half of the twentieth century lowered the voting age to 18. From then until the end of the millennium is considered by many to be MAGA. Liberty took a heavy blow on September 11, 2001 when the Fascists and the Communists leveraged those events into power. Eventually, liberty fought back through democracy and a president was elected by the populous against the elite’s wishes. It looked like liberty had a chance, but it was always on the defensive, and in the next election there was a buildup of fear, resentment & perversity by the Fascists & Communists: that was the moment when democracy failed liberty. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1040_when_democracy_failed_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1040_when_democracy_failed_liberty.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, democracy no Sat, 23 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Liberty has been lost though most people haven’t noticed, and apparently don’t care. If you asked a random person on the street what liberty was, they couldn’t tell you: reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of your own decisions. Given that there’s at least two generations who have no concept of personal responsibility, liberty doesn’t fit anymore anyway. It will take decades for the loss of liberty to be felt, primarily as a declining standard of living because liberty was the most effective method of advancing knowledge, science & commerce. What’s left after liberty is authoritarianism: Marxists, as exemplified by Democrats, are authoritarians with public Elites in charge; Fascists, NeoCons, are authoritarians with private Elites in charge; and Theists are authoritarians with God in charge. The grasping of power by feminists, minorities & weirdos, a majority of the voting population, facilitated by propaganda media; the perverse incentives of the Welfare State, and the emasculation of men, define Post Liberty times. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1039_post_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1039_post_liberty.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, post liberty no Thu, 21 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It’s pretty clear that most people don't even know what liberty is; they take it for granted, and no one has ever even taught them its logic, how they benefit from it, and why the benefits are worth the cost. It requires education because for most people, especially employees, liberty doesn't directly do them any good: they could easily sacrifice it for a UBI, free healthcare, free college, paid family leave, shorter hours, longer vacations, higher minimum wage & preferential hiring. There's also the perversity side: if someone else's accomplishments diminish their own self-image then stop all accomplishment. In that light, there’s no need to quixotically try and retain the liberty we had in the past when the people you're fighting for don't care, and probably don't even want it. It will take a future generation after the gynocentric-privileged-transgender-grievance crowd has played out. Unfortunately, liberty probably can't come back once it's gone, and we won't be around to see anyway. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1038_letting_go_of_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1038_letting_go_of_liberty.mp3 2:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Tue, 19 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor None of us in The Patriarchy: defined as liberty, meritocracy & patriotism; thought liberty would be defeated. We assumed a silent majority would rise up and defend it. Unfortunately, a majority did rise up, and though your wife & daughter may not have been among their ranks, everyone else's was: 87% of young women voters, and 60+ percent of all women, plus their allied minorities & weirdos; and liberty was lost. It wasn’t a surprise in hindsight: egalitarians already had media, education, entertainment, Big Tech & all branches of government, including the judiciary just waiting to collude. Combine that with the unprecedented Shamdemic lockdowns whose whole purpose seemed to be to defeat one man; and when that wasn’t enough, a soft coup via a fraudulent election and iron-fisted censorship; and you can see the extent of their power, both breath & depth. It finally dawned on us that liberty was only a concept, not a guaranteed right, and though it manifested in little ways that we all enjoyed: being in control of your own life has mental health benefits; it wasn't really a tangible thing, so it's loss is more of an existential crisis, the darkening of enlightenment. At least the feminists, minorities & weirdos' mental health will be improved by them being in control and lessening their resentment & envy towards those with testosterone. We can hide in our online communities, stop discussing politics in public, and live our lives in the shadows… Until they come for us anyway. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1037_liberty_was_defeated.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1037_liberty_was_defeated.mp3 2:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, lost no Sun, 17 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It’s over, we’ve lost. We lost the institutions: media, education, entertainment & Tech; we’ve lost control of the definition of words; we’ve lost our history; we’re censored; we’re forced to wear masks; we can’t travel; we have to carry papers; we can be cancelled; we can be forced to call a he, “she”; we are indoctrinated everywhere, even science is propaganda; there are words we can’t say, the Thought Police are real; we can’t defend ourselves; we can’t be masculine; we can’t speak frankly, our neighbors & family members will turn us in; we have to hide in our homes evading questions about being vaccinated; we lost our privacy; we can’t discipline our children; we can't trust the courts; we can’t trust election results; we are discriminated against due to the color of our skin & sex; and we can’t mention any of this without being called crazy. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1036_we_lost.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1036_we_lost.mp3 2:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, we lost no Fri, 15 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Enlightenment occurred in the 18th century: it was the idea of personal autonomy, something few people could understand, let alone take advantage of because all of history was brutal authoritarianism imposed by an elite ruling class. Slavery, either explicit or implicit, was a way of life not an aberration: to think one could reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of their actions was unimaginable: soon the king’s guard, or roving bandits, would come take whatever they wanted at any time. With semi-honest government that recognized the constraints of aristocracy, The Enlightenment was able to foster the beginnings of what we now call liberty. At the time, the focus wasn't individual autonomy so much as the idea of democracy. The French revolution stopped with that, leaving the State in charge, because even philosophers then were still too deeply ingrained in God & scripture to accept personal liberty, which they considered selfishness. Americans, however, went the whole way, providing liberty to the individual, so each person could make decisions from themselves rather than having elites making decisions for them. This is all against a backdrop of kings & priests controlling society, with all decision-making power vested in them, and ruling classes don’t give up power voluntarily, so liberty can be considered a miracle. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1035_liberty_came_from_the_enlightenment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-17_1035_liberty_came_from_the_enlightenment.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, The Enlightenment no Wed, 13 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review the tactics of the Communists: 1. A society is defined by its indoctrination. 2. Truth is whatever the propaganda says it is. 3. Brainwashing causes people to stop thinking for themselves. 4. The Commies now have their hands on the levers of power. 5. Women spread egalitarianism. 6. Authoritarianism is the opposite of liberty so when one increases the other decreases. 7. The Green New Deal is the harbinger of Communism. 8. Communism works until they can’t bake enough bread. 9. Socialism appeals to artists because it forces others to recognize their superiority. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1034_commie_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1034_commie_concepts.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, communists, commies, communism, commie no Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Socialism can mean anything from a benign dictator to Communism but its overriding principle is authoritarian public elites telling the unwashed masses what to do. Socialism is popular among those who abhor personal responsibility, would benefit from forced sharing, and whose careers are held in lower esteem than they think they deserve. One group that fits all those motivations is artists. Since art has no real productivity benefit, there isn’t a lot of demand for it in a market-driven society, so the vast majority of so-called “artists” garner neither money nor respect, and they are notorious for bad personal life choices. Though artist are not held in as high regard, they desperately want to be, and in a socialist society can override market pressures by making themselves important through democracy: state-recognized esteem that also provides money, and absorbs personal responsibility. In fact, artists benefit most from the equality end of socialism: if you want to know who the egalitarians are, start with artists. Like most proponents of equality, artists don’t actually want equality because they think they’re superior: just ask one, they call themselves “creatives;” and since art is in the eye of the beholder, with socialism at their backs, artists can vote others into treating them with the dignity they deserve. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1033_artists_and_socialism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1033_artists_and_socialism.mp3 2:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, artists, socialism no Sat, 09 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Communism, the concept of basing a society on equality in all things, requires authoritarianism because no matter how intense the propaganda & brainwashing, it can never be 100%, which is one of the reasons Communist regimes need gulags, Russian for “Re-education camps,” as a place to put the malcontents. The other reason is that Communists require the gulags as a source of forced labor for their society because left to natural human motivations, Communists can’t bake enough bread. In an equal society where those in need can place demands on those more talented & hardworking, it’s a race-to-the-bottom to be the neediest because if it’s a choice between working and slacking, almost everyone, especially young people, will choose to smoke dope, play videogames & masturbate all day rather than the mundanity of work. Everyone secretly knows this is the case, especially the elites who enforce equality, but as part of the intense propaganda trying to make people go against their nature, anyone who openly admits any doubt is immediately identified as not properly brainwashed and sent to the gulag where their labor is desperately needed for baking. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1032_communists_cant_bake_enough_bread.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1032_communists_cant_bake_enough_bread.mp3 2:24 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, gulag, gulags, Communism, Communists no Thu, 07 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor After decades of environmentalism, it’s totally predictable that something like the Green New Deal (GND) would be seriously considered as the law of the land. The GND calls for public policy to address climate change by: • Elimination of all fossil fuels. • Eliminating all nuclear power. • Replace every combustion-engine. • Retrofit every building in America to be energy efficient. • Use highspeed rail to replace air travel. • And the only way to get rid of farting cows is to get rid of meat. More insidiously, the GND is a Trojan horse for much more expansive social changes, like reducing economic inequality with: • Free college. • Every job provides “family-sustaining wage, family & medical leave, vacations, and a pension.” • Government-provided “healthy food.” • Government-provided “safe, affordable, adequate housing.” • Government-provided “economic security” for all who are “unable or unwilling” to work. The GND uses the word “massive” 13 times, and of course would necessitate communism to institute. Nothing’s bigger or scarier than the end of the world, and there’s an army of brainwashed youth who don’t want to die, so if the GND doesn’t happen now then soon. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1031_green_new_deal.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1031_green_new_deal.mp3 2:53 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Green New Deal no Tue, 05 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There are really only 2 states of society: liberty or authoritarian. Liberty is a relatively new concept in history; it’s personal autonomy: people making decisions for themselves and reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of their actions. Authoritarianism has existed since the beginning: he with the biggest stick wins. Because of that, subservience to authorities is probably encoded in our DNA; most people would rather be told what to do & think; that’s why liberty is such a novel & delicate thing. Authoritarianism comes down to those that are told and those that do the telling. In a Capitalist democracy, this eventually ends up with those who have the most money are the biggest authorities; not in an intellectual or competence sense, but in the practical fact that they can buy the people who are: media, education, politics, entertainment, Tech; and censor any other voices that might disagree. Even with all that influence & power, the authoritarians would be ineffectual if people valued their liberty over their comfort but they don’t: almost everyone lives to be happy, and comfort equals happiness. Authoritarians can deliver comfort, as long as they get to define what “comfort” is. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1030_authoritarians.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1030_authoritarians.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, authoritarian, authoritarians no Sun, 03 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The age-old haves vs. have-nots battle plays out differently in America than it does in the rest of the world because egalitarian authoritarianism was held in check here by liberty. For centuries in America, though there were challenges from both the aristocracy and the egalitarians, liberty remained dominate, but now the authoritarians have ganged up and put liberty on the defensive. What they have in common is women, and women finally got into positions of power to make a deal to pursue equality. Men let it happen, not because they were fooled or intimidated, but because they didn’t want to argue with their daughters, or have conflict with their wives. Slowly all institutions were compromised: Media, Education, Entertainment, Tech, and the entire Democrat party. At first only the coastal cities succumbed but the egalitarian infection expanded from there when liberty-minded men moved to the interior and took their wives & daughters with them. Without newly indoctrinated libertyists, as the men age out, everyplace will be the same, but certainly not equal: that’s the excruciating irony. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1029_spread_of_egalitarianism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-16_1029_spread_of_egalitarianism.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, egalitarianism, women no Fri, 01 Oct 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor America is hip deep in a Communist takeover; almost everyone on the Left Coast is already captured, and they don’t even acknowledge it. I called what used to be a normal guy, a “Commie sympathizer” and he denied America was going that way. I said, “Dude, you're wearing a mask in your car, you can't travel, you can't leave the country, there's a $28 trillion debt, people can't work, if you do work you can be Cancelled, you get turned in by your neighbors, children are told to snitch on their family, and government has new "domestic terrorism" powers to lock people up who say anything about it: what do you call ‘Communist?’" I keep hearing this Communist uprising compared to those of the past, most of which eventually succeeded. Pro-Commie commentators use that track record to ask why prolong the inevitable, though they never mention that those uprisings were all against unarmed populaces. The attack on the 2nd Amendment by the Left was always about gun confiscation but they couldn’t say it, so they kept repeating silly & illogical arguments instead. But guns won’t be enough, not to stop the Communist takeover because the stream of Commie sympathizers would have to be quelled, but with our education system churning them out, the supply isn’t going to dissipate. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1028_commie_takeover.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1028_commie_takeover.mp3 2:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, commies, takeover no Wed, 29 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It’s amazing how completely America’s been taken over; it’s an incredible victory on their part; by whoever it was? The naked power they exhibited without fear of reprisal is astounding; all stories, regardless of network, use the same narrative, obvious collusion, including severe censorship of any competing narratives; and it was totally effective: the level of brainwashing among the general population is stunning; so much in fact that it makes me question my own brainwashing; I might just be a dinosaur from another brainwashing age? Maybe liberty isn’t such a big deal, and maybe we should judge people by the color of their skin rather than the content of their character? Maybe the stock market will go up forever and there are UFOs & ghosts! How would I know? Where would I go not to be brainwashed? I was aware we were under an insidious & intent psychological attack, sham after sham after sham, but I wasn’t aware how far down the rabbit hole we’d gone. The response to the so-called “pandemic” is a perfect example: we don’t even know if there really was a pandemic, or if it was intentional; it seems likely it was an orchestrated mass psychosis for exactly the goals it achieved: a soft coup against a popular and effective president, and the destruction of traditional American values. What’s even more surprising is the lack pushback; apparently, once someone’s been brainwashed, the odds are they never come back to reality. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1027_brainwashing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1027_brainwashing.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, brainwashing no Mon, 27 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor I was always under the impression that propaganda was what despicable Communist & Fascist countries did so either I was wrong, or America is now Communist or Fascist or both. Everybody thinks everybody else believes propaganda but what they believe is true. This self-centered delusion is so ubiquitous that even repeating it here is trite, especially as it applies to me: I also think everyone else has been fooled and I know the truth; or at least I know that most everything is propaganda: I don’t know what the truth is; how could I, where would I get unpropagandized information? People are more susceptible to the propaganda if their own legitimacy is at stake; they don’t even want access to other ideas and points-of-view. The sad fact is, the vast majority of people want to live in the Matrix; and reject the Red Pill. I didn't realize how bad it was before: I like to think that it just got like this during the past decade or so because I'd be embarrassed to find out I’d been living in the delusion too, unaware that everything I heard about liberty, 9/11, and America’s exceptionalism was propaganda. But that was then and this is now, so it's important for me to find how to operate inside what is essentially the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany or both. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1026_ubiquitous_propaganda.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1026_ubiquitous_propaganda.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, propaganda no Sat, 25 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor If you hear something presented as the truth enough times, you begin to believe it, no matter how ludicrous: a man rose from the dead; climate is an existential threat; there was no election fraud. Worse, once people have invested time and energy into learning something, they don’t want to lose it, or admit they were duped, or re-examine everything affected by the change. Plus, the first person who tells you something is subjectively more of an authority than anyone who comes afterwards by far, especially after repeated hearings; that’s why indoctrinating children is so effective. Indoctrination from a young age demonstrably works: you can see the indoctrination of kids to be so-called environmentalists today. My parents were conditioned to hate Commies, and my generation, late-Baby Boomers, were prohibited from seeing race; it simply doesn’t register. I was also indoctrinated to work even though I hate it; I was indoctrinated to have a family even though it doesn’t make personal or financial sense; I was indoctrinated with values that allowed society to function. The same thing has happened in all previous generations but the indoctrination has changed: it’s now almost the complete opposite of what I was indoctrinated with; it makes me wonder if that’s how all civilizations rise & fall. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1025_indoctrination_works.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1025_indoctrination_works.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, indoctrination no Thu, 23 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review what it’s going to take for a revolt to happen: 1. MAGA took 200 years to get to then it lasted 20 years and now it’s gone. 2. Fighting back may make monsters of us all. 3. Any revolt will have to operate from the shadows. 4. It’s more than coincidental that how to save America uses the same tactics as how it was lost. 5. America has the Balkans as an example of what the future holds. 6. The Communists won because there was no strategy to counteract them. 7. Rebel leadership depends on billionaires. 8. If there’s nothing else you can do to resist, at least don’t propagate the lies. 9. If anybody needs a buffalo-lodge hat to become an insurrectionist, I’ve got one. 10. Self-secession is the reverse of secession because the people leave the land. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1024_revolt_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1024_revolt_concepts.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, revolt no Tue, 21 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There’s been several attempts, some still on-going, of small areas in the U.S. symbolically seceding from local control. They never turn out well, anarchy usually doesn’t, but they do serve as an example for communities that want to secede for real. Considering CHAZ seceded from Seattle then why not Spokane from Washington? Unfortunately, the old Civil War method of secession didn’t work the first time, and it’s certainly not going to work now, but the idea of self-secession is catching on, or at least that’s what it seems like from the endless anecdotal stories of someone who knows someone who moved to Idaho, and the perennial news of the lack of moving vans to get out of California. Now that the Wokeness of the coasts can’t be ignored: tent cities, unrestrained illegal immigration, discrimination against whites, riots & lockdowns; Conservatives are said to be moving to the interior states but it’s not clear how many people are practicing self-secession? If it’s a lot, they’re going to run smack into the giant swaths of public & private protected land right in the places where they’re fleeing to; and if newcomers start to squat in those “wilderness” areas, you can bet stopping white men from entering paradise will be a top priority of Democrat administrations, triggering even more self-secession. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1023_self-secession.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-15_1023_self-secession.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, self-secession, secession no Sun, 19 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Democrat party is a hotbed of misandry, the loathing of men. A poll at the beginning of the Biden presidency showed that Democrats were most concerned about Trump supporters (82%), white nationalism (79%), systemic racism (77%), and domestic terrorism (73%); all dog-whistles for white men. But what happens when people are not allowed to work, not allowed to run a business, must carry papers, have their telescreen on watching Big Brother all day, locked in their homes frightened, and at the mercy of fraudulent elections? Then they’re force-fed a narrative of "insurrection" by a guy in a Buffalo Lodge hat and leather pants, standing next to another guy who looks like he just ate a bugger. Six months later these dorks were still in solitary confinement, and the National Guard is still “protecting” the Capitol. There’s a lot of evidence, video & otherwise, that the whole thing was coordinated and lead by False flag operatives. The news coverage talked about police officers being killed but those all turned out to be lies: the only person killed was an unarmed woman. This was after a 100-straight nights of riots and multiple attempts to burn down the federal building in Portland, Oregon which the media called “fiery but peaceful demonstrations;” all forgiven because it’s their side of the insurrection. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1022_insurrection.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1022_insurrection.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, insurrection no Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, a famous Soviet dissident, suggested a strategy for dealing with the constant stream of propaganda & indoctrination like America is now facing; he said, an honest man: • Will not write, sign, nor publish in any way, a single line distorting the truth; • Will not utter such a line in private or in public conversation, nor read it from a crib sheet, nor speak it in the role of educator, canvasser, teacher, actor; • Will not in painting, sculpture, photograph, technology, or music depict, support, or broadcast a single false thought, a single distortion of the truth; • Will not cite in writing or in speech a single “guiding” quote for gratification, insurance, or for his success at work; • Will not be forced to a demonstration or a rally if it runs counter to his desire and his will; • will not take up and raise a banner or slogan in which he does not fully believe; • Will not raise a hand in vote for a proposal which he does not sincerely support; • Will not vote openly or in secret ballot for a candidate whom he deems dubious or unworthy; • Will not be impelled to a meeting where a forced and distorted discussion is expected to take place; • Will at once walk out from a session, meeting, lecture, play, or film as soon as he hears the speaker utter a lie, ideological drivel, or shameless propaganda; • Will not subscribe to, nor buy in retail, a newspaper or journal that distorts or hides the underlying facts. Said simply: don’t propagate lies. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1021_dont_propagate_lies.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1021_dont_propagate_lies.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, propagate lies, Solzhenitsyn no Wed, 15 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor People who believe in liberty are not a silent majority: if questioned closely, most are either egalitarians or aristocrats. Standing on freeway overpasses waving American flags may let others know they are not alone but it isn’t actually doing anything to change the momentum towards authoritarianism. Liberty has essentially lost; it’s return would be the equivalent to a rebellion, and it’s very difficult to see where the rebel leadership would come from? The two political parties are controlled by Marxists or Fascists, neither of which are conducive to liberty, and democracy prevents any kind of grassroots endeavor. That leaves only the ultra-wealthy as liberty’s saviors, and the vast majority of them have already picked an anti-liberty side, or simply choose to remain aloof because their lives won’t be affected no matter who wins. However, if there was a billionaire out there who was willing to risk their wealth & reputation fighting for liberty, Elon Musk for example, there are the tactics he could pursue. Elon would need to find other exorbitantly wealthy liberty people who could be converted to the cause then with their combined mega-wealth, because they would be competing with mega-wealth that defeated liberty, they could create a hedge fund to purchase a majority ownership in the media, news & entertainment then green-light movies, actors & talk shows that espouse liberty ideology to the masses. Secondly, they would have to finance an intense propaganda campaign for school vouchers. All along the way they’d have to finance Libertyist candidates, even though at first none would win, just so the voters start hearing about it again. This is essentially the same plan The Left executed so well except it’s not China doing the financing. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1020_rebel_leadership.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1020_rebel_leadership.mp3 2:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, rebel leadership no Mon, 13 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The quest for equality is egalitarian, which is the basis of Marxism. Egalitarians may not be complete Marxists yet but they inevitably end up Communists as the only way to ensure equality. Here are some things we can do to slow down the Communist juggernaut until we are as organized as they are: • Don't debate with Communists. • Don’t help Communists. • Suspect all news. • Don’t give Communist companies money. • Ignore Communists media & entertainment. • Charge Communists more. • Don’t use Twitter. • Don’t use Google’s search engine. • Unfollow Communists on Facebook. • Leave race & gender information on forms blank. • Act dumb around Communists. Hint: most women and young people are Communists so treat them as such unless they let you know they’re with us. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1019_strategy_against_communists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1019_strategy_against_communists.mp3 2:04 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, communists no Sat, 11 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor “Balkanize” is one of those highbrow words most people aren’t quite sure what it means but they know it when they see it. If you think Seattle is some foreign country with culture, customs & traditions that hold little or no relationship to your own, and which you even suspect to be hostile, then that’s about as Balkan as it gets. California has achieved that status, and the old industrial cities in the East, along with NYC. The people who live in those places, and seem to embrace that lifestyle, have their own costumes, sexual preferences, and odd religions. They appear vaguely familiar, like characters out of movies and television, but you can’t imagine what you’d have in common to talk about if you met one; you’re not even curious. A lot of them are hiding in their houses, afraid of everything, wearing facemasks for no reason, and insisting everyone everywhere get mandatory vaccinations against rumors. They watch Fake News, and listen to people who are obviously lying, yet don’t seem to notice. Luckily, you think, they live someplace far away, and you’re pretty sure you never want to go there; like the Balkans. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1018_america_has_balkanized.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1018_america_has_balkanized.mp3 2:08 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, Balkanize no Thu, 09 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Liberty was lost because it was taken for granted; it wasn’t nourished like the delicate flower it really is, and so was trampled by envious & resentful egalitarians exploiting social pressure. They did it because they wanted to be in charge, and liberty gets back in charge the same way: by exploiting the weakness of Capitalism, the fact that everything is for sale, including liberty. Libertyists must buy back the MSM, fund Entertainment, fund Tech, fund Higher Ed, and take back the schools. These aren’t investments because most of the money will be lost; instead the intent is to use money to take over the narrative: first, recall partisan judges & authoritarian governors; second, use federal power to encourage school vouchers; third, have a Cold War with China; forth, reign in the Tech monopolies with anti-monopoly & tax laws; fifth, remove Social Media’s editorial protection from lawsuits; sixth, enforce the MSM’s impartiality similar to the old Fairness doctrine; and seventh, purge social justice nonsense from the military, and any other public institutions. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1017_how_to_save_america.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-14_1017_how_to_save_america.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Tue, 07 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Irish Democracy is passive resistance to government rules, a perfect tactic to express distaste & disgust with what America has become, but liberty will never be regained by doing nothing. A better approach would be to have a Shadow Revolt. As its name implies, it’s a revolution operating in the shadows: say nothing that gives yourself away, and only mention your intentions to trusted friends; don’t talk about Fake news to the feeble-minded, and walk away if they start to; and support the people who are trying to break through the lies: with votes, with money, or simply defending their good name against vile insult & innuendo. Know that you’re not the only one; there are many of us in the shadows, 75 million at least. Our enemies are the authoritarians: fascists on the right and the egalitarians on the left; who differ only by who they think should be in charge: private elites or public elites: liberty sanctions no elites. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-13_1016_shadow_revolt.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-13_1016_shadow_revolt.mp3 2:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, shadow revolt no Sun, 05 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The enemies of liberty have become overwhelming. For a long time, many of us thought we were only under attack by a small, motivated enemy, but after the Shamdemic, fraudulent presidential election & complete takeover of the media, it's clear we've lost. The only positive news is, at least we know the direness of the situation, and that creates the stark choice rather to fight back or not: for some people no, and for some people yes; it’s time to take sides. For the fighters, we need an evolved strategy, one that adopts some of the winning tactics of our competitors: deplatforming comes immediately to mind; and lying about everything is also easy to get started with; we need a tactical plan. Hundreds of billions of dollars was spent on the takeover: assume everywhere that funding went is infected, and anybody who took some is contagious. Also, if they can lock the world down under manufactured pretenses, we can create some pretense of our own to root out Commies and replace them with Libertyists, just like they’ve been doing to us. Regaining liberty will also take an immense amount of money: unfortunately, most exorbitantly wealthy people follow the "most liberty to the king" model, so that needs to change, probably via confiscatory inheritance taxes. All this brings up Friedrich Nietzsche’s refrain: “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster.” politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-13_1015_fighting_back.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-13_1015_fighting_back.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, fighting back no Fri, 03 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor “Make America Great Again” has become the most divisive slogan in history because more than half the nation doesn’t think America was ever great, specifically feminists, minorities & weirdos. From their pov, liberty, meritocracy & patriotism are evil goals, signs of The Patriarchy; and they can’t imagine when a country with those ideals could ever have been great. As an OWG who experienced America’s greatness, I can definitively identify when it occurred: from January 20, 1981, president Ronald Reagan’s inauguration, until September 11, 2001, when America went to war with “terrorism;” barely 20 years, but that was built on a 2-century foundation of getting ready to be great; the components were all there, and the timing was crucial. Firstly, America was still heterogeneous, the scourge of “diversity” hadn't yet collapsed its customs, culture & traditions; higher education still catered primarily to creating productive members of society: engineers, scientists, doctors; egalitarians were kept in check by lingering Cold War propaganda; and optimism about America and future possibilities were at an all-time high. The pendulum was at the peak of the arc, just starting to swing in the direction of anti-Americans; their insidious control was barely perceptible. However, by the turn of the Millennium, the Good Ol’ Days were over but men didn’t know it yet; now they know. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-13_1014_maga.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-13_1014_maga.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, MAGA no Wed, 01 Sep 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let’s review what happened during the revolution: 1. The revolution already happened and we lost. 2. The Communists won another revolution. 3. Modernity was lost when the post-Modernists captured education. 4. Who was behind the takeover of America? 5. Agitators know what they’re doing; it’s the rest of us who don’t. 6. If I wasn’t a conspiracy theorist, I wouldn’t be any kind of theorist at all. 7. If you want to know the Elites controlling the world, just look at the guest list at Davos. 8. The Shamdemic was WW3 and America was overrun. 9. A soft coup still destroys integrity & trust just as completely. 10. Lockdowns were America’s final capitulation. 11. A fraudulent election is worse than no election at all. 12. Whoever holds the microphone tells everyone else what to do. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-13_1013_revolution_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-13_1013_revolution_concepts.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, revolution concepts no Mon, 30 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Mainstream media loses money, especially print, like newspapers & magazines: the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Newsweek, Politico, Huffington Post, and countless other examples. Investors who want profits get out of the MSM; that's why The Right is so behind in the narrative-setting business, they are too financially conscientious to buy into bankrupt enterprises. It's the folks who have an agenda who buy up news & media properties, but as political mouthpieces, not investments. The Left understands the power of propaganda and how to distribute it, and they don't see the red on the balance sheet, instead they recognize who holds the microphone controls what happens, and those that without a microphone don’t. It’s not paranoia to think that there’s a cabal who own the media, and use it for their own nefarious purposes; the only question is who? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-12_1012_hold_the_microphone.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-12_1012_hold_the_microphone.mp3 2:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, media no Sat, 28 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Elections are about numbers: Communist dictator, Josef Stalin, famously said, "Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count them decide everything.” America had a record high 67% voter turnout in 2020, remarkably during a pandemic. Supposedly, 17 million more people voted than the previous election even though registered voters were only up 2%. Trump received more votes than any sitting president ever, 10 million more than Hillary Clinton in the previous election, and Trump attracted huge rallies, some of the largest in American history, while the Biden campaign often canceled theirs for lack of participation, yet Biden still “won” by over 10 million votes. Also, during the run-up to the election, suspect polling consistently had Biden ahead of Trump by 12 points, which would have been the biggest landslide since FDR won his 3rd term, yet the few polls that were accurate in the 2016 election showed Trump winning again. In the end, Trump also won virtually every bell-weather county yet in the 5 so-called battleground states that Trump won in 2016, key precincts had unverified mail-in ballots swinging 99:1 for Biden: specifically, there were 600,000 votes for Biden and only 3000 for Trump, which is statistically implausible, an overwhelming indication of fraud, yet no courts would even investigate. This was the genesis of Trump’s defeat, something that Stalin knew intimately well. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-12_1011_fraudulent_election.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-12_1011_fraudulent_election.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, fraudulent election no Thu, 26 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor When it looked like Trump was going to win despite the intense barrage of hate being leveled against him by the swamp, they triggered the weapon of last resort: Lockdowns. Not just keeping people ensconced in their homes, but the forced closures of businesses deemed “nonessential,” so that entrepreneurs couldn't even ply their trade over the Internet. Lockdowns had a majority cross-appeal among the Green New Dealers, the sensationalist media, the sanctimonious, the authoritarians, and the self-centered Boomers. In retrospect, it was all so transparent: the release from an American-money sponsored Chinese lab, the fear-mongering, and of course, mail-in ballots. The Lockdowns only seemed marginally reasonable for the 2 weeks they were supposedly going to "flatten the curve" so as not to overwhelm hospitals but as that stretched into a year, hospitals began actually closing because they had no business. Several Republican states didn’t Lockdown at all, and many lifted the Lockdowns as soon as the blatant political nature of the situation clearly manifest itself. The obvious logic that so many states suffered no ill effects ignoring the federal recommendations, Florida and Texas among them, were unconvincing to Democrats and their allies. The fact that so many people immediately capitulated, and refuse to admit their gullibility even now, while those who resist the narrative are still condemned, is a bad sign for America's continued existence. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-12_1010_weaponized_lockdowns.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-12_1010_weaponized_lockdowns.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, lockdowns no Tue, 24 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor President Trump’s enemies were legion: collusion of both established political parties, media, entertainment & foreign governments. All he had on his side was his immediate family and 75 million Americans, powerless to assist against what could only be called a soft coup. First there was the Russia hoax, then the “Fine People” hoax, the Drink Bleach hoax, Lafayette Square hoax, Kids in Cages hoax, the “Losers” hoax, Russian Bounty hoax, and the Ukraine hoax which ended in a hoax impeachment. Ultimately, when none of that worked, the Shamdemic. The coup was coordinated, and extremely well planned & financed: the Widows and ex-wifes of billionaires supplied obscene amounts of cash, and all of the media, especially Hollywood, poured on an equal value of invective. Voting laws were changed without approval, courts refused to hear cases; at every step, every lever of power had been co-opted and anyone who said otherwise was insulted, intimidated & marginalized. Trump did have a chance but he had the naivete of a non-politician so either allowed or was forced to surround himself with untrustworthy underlings. He thought people would act out of loyalty, to him personally, or the country in general, but instead they were all swamp creatures, deeply beholden to the Special Interests that got them where they were; Elites who all think they’re brilliant through self-congratulations and nepotism. Trump could not be controlled by the establishment so they ganged up to get rid of him using any means necessary. Lucky it was a soft coup because the hard coup was next. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-12_1009_soft_coup.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-12_1009_soft_coup.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, coup, Trump no Sun, 22 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The 21st century has already experienced a world war: in the most literal sense, the entire world was engulfed by the Shamdemic. It involved death in relatively small numbers but enough to invoke full-blown politically capitulation, and it collapsed national economies, not so much their destruction, but instead their takeover by elites. The timing was perfect: it’s not a coincidence that populists were poised to win around the world, only to be stymied at the last moment by the sanctimony of medicine. The Shamdemic’s biggest victim was trust: every bit of information about it is shrouded in intentional uncertainty, and anybody who questions the official narrative is dismissed, insulted & censored. Just look at the aftermath: it crippled already fearful personalities, enabled authoritarianism, undermined experts, discredited science, fomented civil war, exposed the judiciary as feckless, emboldened our enemies, and alienated half the population. A decade from now, America will either be embarrassed by our reaction or we’ll be totally converted by it but we’ll never recover. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-11_1008_shamdemic.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-11_1008_shamdemic.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, shamdemic, pandemic no Fri, 20 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Every January the World Economic Forum (WEF), known as Davos after the host city, is where the world’s most influential people fly in their private jets to meet personally together. Attendance is invitation only, and WEF yearly membership fees ranges from $60K to $600K depending on their billionaire level, with attendees such as Bill Gates, Prince William, Marc Benioff, George Soros, Jamie Dimon, Jack Ma, singer Shakira, and actors Forest Whitaker & Matt Damon. One year, Facebook threw an infamous party where specially made stuffed animals illuminated dancers with lasers shot from their eyes as John Legend performed. WEF’s stated goal is: "engage the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas." The 2021 theme was "Great Reset;" it’s easy to tell just from the title that liberty, and specifically the American way of life, is these people’s intended target, so if you’re looking for the where, when & of how the elites get together to control the world, and what they’re plans are, just watch Davos. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-11_1007_davos.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-11_1007_davos.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, Davos no Wed, 18 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor I might as well accept it: I’m a conspiracy theorist. Not of the “jet fuel doesn’t melt steel,” antivaxx, nor “moon landing was a hoax” contingent; but definitely in the world Communist cabal, “Epstein didn’t kill himself,” climate denier camp. In my conspiracy theory, there is indeed a swamp and it’s full of people who think they know better-n-me; the news media is little more than propaganda; science is more politics than facts; and women truly believe “it’s their turn now.” For harboring these beliefs I get to be called names by people on psyche medication and no education beyond useless undergraduate degrees, whose careers are actually anti-productive. Unfortunately, these folks also significantly outnumber me which in a democracy makes them right and me wrong. I can only hope that someday somewhere the actual truth will come out that supports my so-called radical beliefs, but since the winners write the history, that seems a remote chance indeed. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-11_1006_conspiracy_theorist.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-11_1006_conspiracy_theorist.mp3 2:04 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, conspiracy theorist no Mon, 16 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Until recently liberty prevailed in America even though it was defeated in most of the world by egalitarianism, which is authoritarian-enforced equality, particularly as manifested in the mid-20th Century Communist states. During Marx’s time, though he thought it was inevitable, egalitarianism did not sweep the political landscape. Marx thought the reason why was that people were insufficiently Woke so he encouraged class warfare between oppressors vs. victims and those who thought to save themselves by becoming allies of the victims. This strategy was successful to incite the Russian revolution: the poor peasants, the so-called proletariat; against the Middle class peasants, the kulaks. Because of the classless nature of liberty, previous attempts at dividing Americans with this tactic hadn’t reached the 51% threshold needed in a democratic nation to overturn the status quo so agitators switched from class to race, and took the tactic one step further, exacerbating the pressure by utilizing one of Saul Alinsky’s most notorious rules for radicals: “rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities to the point of overt expression; stir up dissatisfaction and discontent; and provide a channel into which people can angrily pour their frustrations to the point of conflict;” combined with a if-you’re-not-with-us-you’re-against-us” attitude. Also, elites likewise see social contentment as an impediment to their power, so the agitators are supported by both ends of the political spectrum, leaving the Middle Class, typically consisting of conservative white men, as the kulaks. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-11_1005_agitators.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-11_1005_agitators.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, agitators, kulaks no Sat, 14 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There’s no question that there’s an attack on American values: liberty, meritocracy & patriotism; but who’s behind it? There are players with agendas we can only guess at by watching their actions; for example, all the media companies are spinning the same issues the same way; and all the tech companies coordinating against and for the same people & ideologies. It’s also a question of how did the political process and even the judiciary get captured? And the intelligence agencies seemed to be involved too. There’s some kind of worldwide conspiracy: it could be Marxist ideologists, or perhaps China, or maybe aliens? Whoever is holding the levers of power, do they do it directly: putting their people into key corporate positions, and paying social media & entertainment opinion-makers to say what they want; or do they do it surreptitiously by financing organizations that were already attacking America’s customs, culture & traditions? If raw Capitalism is the method, then Conservatives can fight back by also using money, but if it’s the result of voting majorities: the combination of feminists, minorities & weirdos, then America will remain in the hands of the mysterious cohort for the foreseeable future. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-10_1004_whos_behind_it.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-10_1004_whos_behind_it.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, conspiracy no Thu, 12 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Enlightenment, the concept of self-determination rather than fate; and democracy rather than aristocratic or Ecclesiastic rulers; evolved in 18th century, and was implemented in the 19th, starting with the United States, but eventually all of the West. America took it one step further however, all the way to personal autonomy, where individuals reaped the rewards of their own decisions, calling it “liberty.” However, liberty requires opportunity, and opportunity equals wealth, so the wealthy had most of the liberty; and the flip side of liberty is that individuals also suffer the consequences of their own actions, which most people don’t like. The inevitable backlash, was called Post Modern, usually associated with Communism. Envy & resentment having the power they do, Communism swept the world, controlling half of it during the middle of the 20th century, but it was held in check by the Cold War. When the Cold War ended because of the productivity superiority of liberty, Post Modernism again burst forth. Put another way, the fall of the Soviet Union signaled the start of a new revolution, though few recognized it at the time; it was a Cold Revolution, and it slowing began gaining social & political victories, mostly in the cities and on the coasts, until the tipping point was reached, as proven by the 2020 presidential election: America is now Post Modern. The question is will it stay that way? One possibility is that America become like Europe; another is that it collapses completely; whatever the final outcome, The Enlightenment is over. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-10_1003_post_modern_revolution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-10_1003_post_modern_revolution.mp3 2:47 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, post modernism no Tue, 10 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Communists aren't anonymous anymore; most don’t say they’re Communists but when you ask them what they want, it’s Communism: “I just want everything to be equal,” they’ll say without a hint of self-awareness; and many do proudly proclaim they are in actual fact, Communists. Communists in America didn't go away when the Soviet Union fell, they just got more tactical and way more effective. The Communist revolution strategy is well-known: they intend to unmoor a Capitalist society from its history, denigrate its culture, customs & traditions, undermined authority & finish it off with debasement of the currency. Many people are relying on their guns to save them when the Communists show up on their doorstep, seemingly unaware that the Deep State and all the levers of power are controlled by the enemy. Through years of Affirmative Action & White guilt, every pubic institution has been compromised. Combine that with the natural fecklessness of Republicans, and the authoritarian bent of NeoCons, when the rioters get to your neighborhood, there will be no police or the police will be on the wrong side. This is how Communist revolutions are usually successful. You can either capitulate, which most already have; or hide in your home, but there’s plenty of history that indicates how that turns out. Or you could treat the occupation passive-aggressively, and just not do as they say, which is probably the only option. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-10_1002_communist_revolution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-10_1002_communist_revolution.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, Communists, revolution no Sun, 08 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Often people talk about a new revolution in America; most pundits poo-poo the idea, claiming it’s paranoia, and respond mockingly, but the fact is, the revolution already happened; sometime during the Trump presidency, after which he was deposed through a soft coup of propaganda, fraud & deep state collusion. The revolution was complete, with a takeover of politics, courts, Speech, military, education, society & Tech. It was a total victory: virtually everything has crossed over from liberty, people reaping the rewards of their own actions, to egalitarianism, equality in all things. Righty pundits talk as if this is just a minor setback; not realizing what’s already occurred, and none of the rest of us seemed to be aware of it either. America’s not going back… Ever. It’ll probably continue on this trajectory to at least socialism, and ultimately Communism because what’s going to stop it? The revolution happened without a shot fired or a debate had because husbands don’t want to argue with their wife & daughters, and Libertyists avoid conflict, preferring to live-and-let-live. Unfortunately, that was exactly the wrong strategy if you’re outnumbered by the revolutionaries. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-10_1001_the_revolution_already_happened.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-10_1001_the_revolution_already_happened.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, revolution no Fri, 06 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor This is the 1000th episode of PRay TeLL Dr. Hash, so I thought I'd wrap it up with a little ditty having the same flavor of wisdom, guidance & advice, mixed with humor, humanity & hubris, I’ve been come to be know for. I’m the world’s only-ever simultaneously licensed doctor, lawyer, accountant & engineer; Now you... I’m the world’s only-ever doctorates in medicine, law & computer science; Now you... I’m the world’s only-ever Complete Homo Universalis Renaissance Myn; Now you... I'm the only 100-country travel writer with pictures, videos & fly-thrus; And I'm the only aspiring House candidate with a steam train, hedge maze & bronze zoo; I'm the only one who did all of that, some for me, but mostly for you. I hope all this braggadocio has done some good, making you a more confident, competent & conscientious person because this game’s getting pretty old if only one of us can play. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-09_1000_now_you.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2021-07-09_1000_now_you.mp3 2:04 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics no Wed, 04 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor This may get a little personal, but let’s review anyway: Few people are actually self-aware, though everyone thinks they are. It takes wisdom to know what wisdom is. We're all the Center-of-the-Universe but that doesn't seem to keep it from spinning. You can’t plan your own life, and certainly no one else can plan it for you. Statistics predict that your life is within 4 standard deviations of everyone else's life. Everything's simple, but you can make it complicated if that helps. If there's something more important than your health, the end is closer than you think. Men date to get laid, women date to get paid. The differing reasons men and women divorce is proof that the genders are not the same. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_999_personal_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_999_personal_concepts.mp3 2:09 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, personal no Mon, 02 Aug 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Marriage has always benefited men more than women; traditionally men got a domestic servant, nanny, and most importantly, a nightly sex partner, while women used to get protection & security, but in a civil society, both of those qualities have been supplanted by The State, so there’s nothing evolutionarily appealing about monogamy, while hypergamy, the search for ever better mates, is in their genome. That’s why laws and religious condemnation against divorce used to be so strict, because most women would seek to escape the servitude of marriage, and unfettered by those restrictions, it's almost always the woman, 80% of the time, who initiates divorce now. The reasons for divorce differ between the sexes; for the wife, the top causes are: Lack of emotional support. Lack of reassurance. Finances. Expectations not met. Infidelity. Lack of romance. Abuse. The top reasons men get divorced are quite different: Loss of sexual attraction. Denial of sex. Infidelity. Disrespect. Feels neglected. No longer idealized. Finances. The reasons only partially overlap; women are looking for sympathy, men are expecting sex.The mundane difficulties of a marriage; the daily drama, unruly children & lack of commonality, only contribute to its demise. Once contempt sets in, the marriage is over. With differences like these, it's remarkable anybody stays married. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_998_reasons_for_divorce.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_998_reasons_for_divorce.mp3 2:51 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, divorce no Sat, 31 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Dating is an anachronism; few younger people date anymore, many because they don't know how, but most because they can't, the quarry has become prohibitively particular & elusive. Brides used to have little say about who the groom would be: old, fat, ugly, stupid, dull, abusive; but now it's the complete opposite: they have unrealistic Disney princess standards. Plus, dating was for finding a mate but society essentially discourages longterm pairing because of the cost of a breakup to men, and children are considered a threat to the environment; not to mention the brainwashing of young Western women into thinking they are racist bigots who should be filled with self-loathing for their white privilege. Since in-person dating became impossible because of the fear of encountering an SJW, Online dating, such as eharmony, Match & EliteSingles, came into vogue for awhile, but it didn't work out for men or women; barely better than no dating at all due to the damage to the self-esteem of everyone involved. At the extreme end was Tinder, a phenom that purported to conveniently provide men access to no strings attached sex with willing partners. It was so successful at capturing the public's consciousness that “swipe right,” for being interested, entered the Pop culture vernacular. There are rumors that a very few men did, indeed, live the life of a sultan with a harem, but it didn't take long for the other 80% of men to leave the platform all together rather than face the constant rejection. Statistics show that men would swipe right 60% of the time, while women would swipe left, rejecting them, 96% of the time. Unless a man is in the top 15% in appearance, they'll have no success online dating, and the very attractive women are almost all prostitutes using the service to find customers. Combine this with the idea that all men are rapists, and the ingredients add up to a toxic brew of society-destroying implication. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_997_online_dating.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_997_online_dating.mp3 3:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, online dating no Thu, 29 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There's nothing more personal to you than your own health; in fact, being healthy is unique in that only your thoughts are more egocentric. Make no mistake, people constantly talk about their diet, exercise & medicine because it's about them, and nothing is more interesting to you than yourself, but that doesn't make it any less important because nothing is more important to you than yourself. Here are some recommendations that everyone needs to know: most-importantly, there's not many things about your health you can control but your weight is one of them. Being overweight will shorten your life, and obviously, many people have made that choice, but if you're not one of them, keeping to a Low Carb diet is the most impactful thing you can do. Be aware that exercise is not an effective way to lose weight, but it's still important to keep your muscles healthy, especially your heart; brisk walking is the easiest. As for the food you eat; there's no such thing as “healthy” food; Big Macs actually do more to keep you fit & thin than something organically-grown. The best strategy to keep healthy is to set a goal for yourself, like no weight gain. Have easy rules like: no bread, no rice, no fruit & no sugar. If you want a snack, eat nuts. It’s easy to look on the label of a product in the store to see how many carbs there are: anything over 10 better be worth it to you, and some things are; if you love Angle Food cake with strawberries and homemade ice cream for you birthday, that’s worth it but you’re going to need to fast tomorrow. Fasting, coffee and diet sodas are okay, is the easiest & quickest way to lose weight if you can just make it past the afternoon hunger pangs, and you’ll sleep better too. The number one recommendation is to have a routine and favorite low carb foods for every normal day; and on days where your routine is broken, well, start trying to be healthy again tomorrow... politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_996_health.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_996_health.mp3 3:09 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, health, diet, exercise no Tue, 27 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Whenever someone wants to explain their problems to you, they all begin with the refrain, “it’s complicated” in chagrin, to set the expectation of a long explanation, or maybe just to gather their thoughts. The phrase has become so ubiquitous, it can convey almost anything; however, the reality is, it’s not complicated; there’s a logical solution to every problem, no matter how involved things are, but that almost always means someone wins and someone loses, making “it's complicated” a catchall for self interest, irrationally & chance. In popular culture dialect, “it’s complicated” has become a euphemism for a failed relationship, perhaps even other love interests are involved. Often “it’s complicated” is used to end an uncomfortable conversation; once the phrase is uttered, that’s a clue the speaker doesn’t want to talk about something anymore. “It’s complicated” is also a so-called, weasel-word; something somebody says so that they don’t have to explain themselves when a problem is clearly their responsibility. Actually, if “it’s complicated” didn’t exist, some other term would need to take its place because truth & honesty aren’t always what they’re cracked up to be; I’d explain why but it’s complicated. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_995_its_complicated.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_995_its_complicated.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, it's complicated no Sun, 25 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor You may think you’re the center of the universe but that doesn't mean you're any different than anyone else. Statistically, everything you do is almost the same as everything everybody else does. The fact is, none of us stand out; we all fall within the same standard deviation, and even though we may think our problems or experiences are unique, the reality is everyone we know and don’t know is navigating the same ocean. If your life is messy, be assured so are the lives of everyone you see around you; if you are dissatisfied, so aren't we all; if you never get lucky, well, none of us do... At least, statistically speaking; 3% of the time you will be lucky, but you wouldn't bet those odds in Vegas. Your expectations of reality are set by reading stories and watching movies, but that’s fiction written by other people with the expectations they have from reading stories and watching movies of made up values & experiences of the fiction writers before them; it's a continuing cycle of misinformation. Families aren't like they're portrayed in popular culture, neither are jobs, nor relationships, nor anything for that matter. It has to be that way because life is pretty dismally mundane, and without a positive outlook, without optimism, human beings are nothing more than animals. We subconsciously know we’re nothing special, we’re all within the Standard Deviation, but don’t want to admit it to ourselves, so everyone suffers in a community of voluntary delusion. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_994_standard_deviation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-27_994_standard_deviation.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, standard deviation no Fri, 23 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There are endless Pop psychology articles and a whole self-help industry that caters to the illusion that individuals can plan their lives. These so-called, experts, exploit our dual vulnerabilities of self-abortion & thinking each of us is the center of the universe, and our inherent evolutionary sense of optimism. It’s all fantasy; give no credence to any advice from pretenders whose own lives probably leave something to be desired or they wouldn’t trying to be selling snake oil to you. The simple fact is that no one can plan their life without being able to predict the future, which you can’t, and anyone who says they can is a liar. It also requires wisdom, but wisdom requires knowledge, experience & self-awareness that you can only get by living your life, an impossible circularity. What you can do is live your life by following the path of least resistance. If you’re good at sports, do that until you can no longer compete; if you’re good in school, do that until everyone else is better; if your family has a business that you enjoy, enjoy it. If the luckiest opportunity in the world comes along, becoming an astronaut or president of the United States, and you want it, take it. Here’s the most important part of planning your life this way: if you don’t want it, don’t do it. No value can be placed on your own happiness, satisfaction & contentment, and it’s subjective, so what other people think doesn’t matter; and if it does, factor that in too if it’s easy & convenient. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-26_993_planning_your_life.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-26_993_planning_your_life.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, plan your life no Wed, 21 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Being the center of the universe is the subjective self-delusion that your goals & desires matter, but it's also true: you are The Center Of The Universe. There's nothing more important in the universe than you because if you're gone then what difference does it make? You're not the first one to think that way, everyone does; in fact, there's a whole philosophy, Solipsism, that postulates everyone but you is a figment of your imagination. The modern manifestation of this idea is that we all live in our own computer simulation; the theory being you control the simulation, you just don't know it, but if you think on something hard enough, it will happen; it's simply the idea of faith transmuted to the silicon age. A presocratic sophist would recite the assertion: nothing exists, and even if it did, nothing can be known about it, and even if it could, knowledge about it cannot be communicated to others. This eventually evolved into the famous truism of “I think, therefore I am,” which obviously defines you as The Center Of The Universe. Being The Center Of The Universe, everything is about you: what you feel, what you want, what you think. This has the decidedly negative ramification that no one else's opinion is valid; it doesn’t matter how educated or successful an expert is, people always go with their own gut. They somehow convince themselves that the expert isn't privy to the information that they have, or simply haven't considered the issue properly yet. Even trying to communicate this concept is a mishmash or first and third person pronouns because language also reflects your universe-centricity: I, I, I, me, me, me, mine. Even if we could all read each other's minds in one giant psychic neural network, such that you wouldn't be you anymore, the hivemind entity would then be The Center Of The Universe. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-26_992_the_center_of_the_universe.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-26_992_the_center_of_the_universe.mp3 3:15 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, center of the universe no Mon, 19 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor People want to think they have wisdom in their DNA, not that it comes from knowledge, experience & self-awareness, because those things require tremendous effort & time, and there’s lots of people with more than them. Wisdom is defined as breath of knowledge times depth of experience times-self awareness. Looking into a person’s history, we can usually discern these metrics: educational degrees & professional licenses demonstrate breath & depth of knowledge; entrepreneurship, responsibility, ambition, travel & art demonstrate experience; and a happy & fulfilled life indicates both internal and external awareness. By measuring these things we can determine that, historically, Benjamin Franklin & Richard Burton were wise; as was Francis Bacon, Leonardo di Vinci, Marcus Cicero, Herbert Simon, Imhoptep, Francis Galton, Albert Schweitzer, Avicenna, Baha ad-Din al-Amili, and many others that we don’t know because they weren’t famous. In fact, most people confuse fame with wisdom. Steve Jobs wasn’t wise even though he appeared to be because he was earth-shaking. Gandhi, or any guru, preach only confusion, and live empty lives. Dian Fossey was certainly not wise; she lived alone in Africa and knew nothing about anything but gorillas. A lot of people have self-awareness, entrepreneurship, experience & knowledge in one or two areas, but don’t know anything about anything else; or have limited travel & life experience, which means they couldn’t synthesize advice from the entire panorama of life. It’s actually easy to identify wisdom but quite difficult to find wise people; however, I'd like to know more about Elon Musk? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-26_991_what_is_wisdom.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-26_991_what_is_wisdom.mp3 2:52 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wisdom no Sat, 17 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Self-awareness is understanding your own character, motives & desires. One of the aspects of children is that they have no self-awareness; they do not understand their own motivations, nor the motivations of others. Adults know this so excuse a child's lack of courtesy, social awkwardness & inability to complete a complex task; but people are not so charitable to supposedly mature adults. Being self-aware improves everything: relationships, satisfaction & control; while also reducing anxiety, stress & depression. Unfortunately, self-awareness is something that most people lack: in a large study, only a tenth of people showed self-awareness though they all believed they were. Self-awareness also includes recognition of how others interpret you. The most successful people understand that if they want adulation & respect, they must present an outward appearance that attracts it; which includes not doing things that would detract from that impression, because resentment, envy & spite underlay most longterm interactions. You must also be able to determine when other people can be trusted enough to be allies; and if untrustworthy, how to mollify them sufficiently so as not to become active enemies working against you. It’s probably a good thing most people aren’t self-aware because they would be really disappointed to know what other people really think of them. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-26_990_self-awareness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-26_990_self-awareness.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, self-aware, self-awareness, self awareness no Thu, 15 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There are lots of things to review about society: Nothing represents the American psyche better than statistics. It's not a question of if there’s going to be another civil war, only if you'll be on the winning side. Technology allows for multiple virtual societies to exist simultaneously on the same geography. No one can predict the future so no choice is any more inscrutable than any other. Reality TV is a blurry reflection of real reality. The biggest part of mysticism is the magic. People are attracted to superheroes because they want to imagine they are one. Ambition is the defining element of liberty. McDonald's has had the luck or foresight to surf the wave of relevance. It doesn't take many revolutionaries to defeat a complacent population. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-26_989_societal_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-26_989_societal_concepts.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, society no Tue, 13 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Karl Marx said “Revolutions are the locomotives of history.” Growing up in the late 1960s and early 70s, like most kids with a burgeoning sense of history, I had a fascination with revolutionaries. I wrote high school civics papers on the Symbionese Liberation Army, Weathermen & Black Panthers. The most interesting insight I gained about revolution is that it doesn't take many true believers to start one, especially if half the nation is willing to let them hide out in their basements, get them the ingredients to make explosives, and cover for them socially and in the media. Back then, Communist revolutions rocked most nations, eventually controlling half the world; only the Cold War kept them in check; but the Soviet Union fell three decades ago, and egalitarian sympathies have returned with a vengeance, so that revolutionary times are here again, though not yet up to those old levels of U.S. violence: the RFK, MLK & George Rockwell assassinations; riots at the Democratic National Convention, Washington & Baltimore; and Vietnam war demonstrations; all capped by the National Guard killings at Kent State. However; with Social Justice Warriors rioting in Democrat cities around the nation, and a world intent on forced sharing, it's getting close. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-30_988_revolutionaries.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-30_988_revolutionaries.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, revolutionaries no Sun, 11 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Every generation wants new music, new fashion, and new places to shop & eat. That's why the icons of the previous generation, the big department stores, movie theaters, and fast food joints, are disappearing; they have failed to remain hip & relevant. McDonald's was a high-profile aberration of the typical slide into oblivion; they were able to hold on a few generations because they innovated with Playlands, Kid's Meals, worldwide expansion & catchy advertising; but now they seem to be on the edge of the abyss. McDonald's has recently been on the receiving end of some vicious press; the Big Mac has morphed from national icon to a symbol of America's over-indulgence. You can tell when a business is in decay when the loyal clientele are mostly people from the previous generation. In the mornings, probably because of the free Senior coffee, and quiet & comfortable seating, the only people in McDonald's are retirees conversing together in flocks. McDonald's has taken the place of coffee shops but they can't possibly be making a profit from these customers; it must be the busy drive-thrus keeping the doors open. Because McDonald's now seems vulnerable, the hypercritical trend-mongers smell blood and they're probably going to go for the jugular soon. McD's is headed for some tough times, but so are we all, and we're going to want something familiar to sit it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-25_987_mcdonalds.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-25_987_mcdonalds.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, McDonald's no Fri, 09 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Ambition is one of those human traits that separates us from animals. Ambition builds cities and lands on the moon; ambition is why we have science & engineering; ambition is the cornerstone of almost every accomplishment that makes life worth living. The thing about ambition is that it consists of more than the desire to achieve; it also includes the willingness to face effort, adversity & failure to do it. Because so many people are unwilling to make those sacrifices, ambition is viewed differently by different cultures, and can even be considered the determining factor between the ideologies of personal agency versus egalitarianism. Though ambition is lauded as a precondition of success in the West, it's discouraged in Eastern traditions because it supposedly imposes on spirituality. However, a less charitable explanation is that the despot rulers of those countries saw ambition as a threat. Ambition is also held in poor regard among the incompetent & lazy, the petulance of losers. Influential philosophers, such as Plato & Aristotle, were suspect of ambition, presumably having little of their own. While ambitious people who succeed have more satisfaction with life, the danger is that those who failed are vexed with anxiety, anguish & despair. But whatever the outcome, ambitious people experience a far more interesting & meaningful existence than those without. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-25_986_ambition.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-25_986_ambition.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, ambition no Wed, 07 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Everyone wants to be a superhero. An important aspect of superheros is that they are unique; most people don’t have superpowers.It's not just being strong or able to jump tall buildings in a single bound that's attractive; it's that other people can’t.It's the recognition, even the adulation that they are seeking, not any particular superior physical trait. Consider how many superheroes have ridiculous, essentially useless, powers: turning into ice or fire, shooting laser beams out of their eyes, stretchiness. A gun works just as well to capture criminals and you don't have to wear googles or flexible underpants. When children imagine themselves, it isn't what they can do but what makes them different from someone else, especially in their teens as they approach adulthood. Obviously, this need to be exceptional is evolutionary, and must have a component of attracting the attention of the opposite sex; or to gain control, which also provides better mating opportunities. The more pragmatic youth imagine themselves to be Ironman or Batman because those superheroes seems within the realm of scientific plausibility; but just as many more ephemeral-thinking children are attracted to Superman from the planet Krypton or Green Lantern who wears a ring from another universe, because there’s no way those powers are possible on earth. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-25_985_superheroes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-25_985_superheroes.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, superheroes, superhero no Mon, 05 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There isn't necessarily something wrong with a society that thinks it takes magic to protect them and solve their problems, whether it be gods or superheroes, but it does show a distinct lack of maturity. To a child, their parents and family are giants who love & protect them. In a child's mind, the mundane capabilities of these giants seem magical since a child does not yet have understanding of the workings of the world around them. It's natural that this perception would follow them into adulthood, but people waiting for Superman never solve their own problems. Religion is full of magical heroes, with god being the most powerful. It’s not enough to just be exceptional, there has to be magic too; Jesus wasn’t The Savior without the miracles, and Mohammad was just another sage in the desert if he hadn't of moved a mountain or rode a flying horse. Medicine is also full of magic: chiropractors, naturopaths, acupuncturists, aroma therapists, and all other kinds of cures that don’t involve complicated ideas to understand. That is the most significant aspect of mystics, they are simple to understand: magic is a result of magical powers; the answer may be circular & vague but it is short, specific & easy to comprehend. Societies steeped in mysticism have difficulty understanding the world isn’t flat, and without a conscious effort to reorganize their thinking through scientific education, the belief in magic never goes away. If mystical-thinking is not counteracted with critical-thinking, no society will progress much past a king or commune. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-24_984_mysticism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-24_984_mysticism.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, mysticism, magic no Sat, 03 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It's an odd reality that people are starving for reality; everyone is so fascinated with Reality TV, it must be something fundamental to our ego & evolutionary development. People grasp that their own experiences aren’t matching what they've been told to expect: others don't act like the characters in books & movies; human interaction is fraught with hidden biases & resentments that no one ever talks about, and when they do, it's always about how someone else is at fault; and our inner feelings are dominated by guilt piled onto insecurity and laced with fear so we also don't speak about the shallowness & artificiality of everything either. People's expectations aren't meeting reality, so they are attracted to something that seems more honest & familiar, but even so-called reality TV is scripted; if it was real life, you'd see those people on TV taking psych drugs, having diarrhea, getting minor cuts, sleeping poorly, doubting themselves and spending long periods of boredom wasting their lives. When the cameras turn off, that's the real reality. The few people who do have their lives figured out seem alien and hard to meet, and none of them are ever on Reality TV. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-24_983_reality_tv.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-24_983_reality_tv.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, reality tv no Thu, 01 Jul 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor At sometime in your life, you’ve been presented with the quandary of whether one person’s life should be sacrificed for many lives, or whether the life of a child is more valuable than that of an adult. There are 10 famous moral quandaries, titled: Lifeboat, The Mad Bomber, Drug Bust, Hit & Run, Nieces & Daughters, The Pregnant Woman, The Neighbor, Spam Filtering, The Accident, and Concentration Camp. If you take these tests, you’ll find the choices are inscrutable, but there is a logical & rational way to view them, to wit: no one can know the future, no one has all information, and there are no moral choices, so do the most expedient thing given the information you have, no guessing. For example, most things you know nothing about, so don’t act; who knows where the next lightening strike will be; it could be exactly where you’d be standing if you moved. If your children are threatened, save them, and hope the rest of the people transport through a space portal just in the nick of time. Often hostage-taking is used to justify betrayal: if a kidnapper said you had to violate all you believed in or they will kill your son, what are you going to do? Do whatever you can to rescue him but certainly don't let the kidnappers win twice by destroying your honor. To sacrifice yourself so that a child can live, or even a whole town, is futile at best, and could possible make the situation worse: one of the people in that town could be the next Hitler. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-24_982_inscrutable_choices.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-24_982_inscrutable_choices.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, inscrutable, choices no Tue, 29 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Diversity is a real thing, and this country, even this world, by embracing diversity we have become irrevocably divided, which will inevitably lead to some kind of civil war; but modern technology means it doesn’t have to be the shooting kind across physical borders. Instead, what seems to come out of an old Star Trek episode; the concept of a virtual civil war is possible; where people stay where they are but live separately. If we’re not going to have a heterogeneous society like we had in the past, then we can have virtual homogeneous societies ignoring each other. We already watch different news, attend different sports, eat at different restaurants, drink different coffee, listen to different music, etc. We live as multiple different peoples on the same piece of ground, and our phones know the difference so the infrastructure exists to tell us what stores we can go into: Democrat, Republican, whatever? We could extend the separation even further to have our own elected officials and laws. It doesn’t mean there wouldn’t be a war going on, just that nobody would get hurt. It would still technically be a civil war because people would be bickering online, and there would be constant conflict on how shared resources should be divided. The biggest problem with the idea isn’t the technology, but ideology; those who embrace liberty would have no problem, but egalitarians attach mystical guarantees & obligations to people just for being alive, so they would demand that the citizens from another virtual society take care of everyone, regardless of who’s responsible, just like they insist now; and force would be required to stop them. It’s ironic that the major problem with a virtual civil war is that it takes violence to sort things out. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-23_981_implementing_virtual_civil_war.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-23_981_implementing_virtual_civil_war.mp3 2:46 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, virtual, civil war no Sun, 27 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor America never had “diversity” before, we had heterogeneity; people were forced to conform to the basic values of liberty, work ethic & personal responsibility; the so-called Patriarchy. Even if you hated your neighbor, you could expect them to stay out of your business and carry their own weight. And it used to be taboo to even discuss the possibility of there maybe being another American civil war on the horizon, but the signs have finally become too big to ignore. The two sides, liberty vs. egalitarians, have such contempt for each other; and there's so little compromise between the opposing ideologies, that there's no coming back. Once people get over the jump of thinking civil war is possible, it becomes probable. The only way to stop it is for Republicans to win overwhelmingly in elections, then take over education & media in an attempt to re-establish some kind of universal national identity again. Even if that does happen, it's likely the big Lefty enclaves will become city-States that pass their own laws & taxes, but still remain under nominal federal control like Indian reservations. Their voting would only apply to themselves; they already have Urban Growth Boundaries, and de facto tariffs. Even though they claim diversity, they’re actually quite homogeneous in their egalitarian thinking, with a sense of self-righteous certainty that overcomes all rationality. If they were given Reservation-like autonomy, they would probably take it. Then the most likely scenario will be those cities will deteriorate from the inside until that generation of revolutionaries are pushed out, and if that doesn’t work, at least the violence part of a civil war would be postponed, and the warring factions clearly identified so that people have time to choose sides with their feet. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-23_980_is_a_civil_war_coming.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-23_980_is_a_civil_war_coming.mp3 3:01 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, civil war, liberty, egalitarian no Fri, 25 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor 1% of Americans own 38% of the wealth; 1% of Americans claim to be abducted by aliens; and 1% of Americans are in jail. 13% of Americans live below the poverty line; have never heard of global warming; and are satisfied with how things are going. 27% of Americans believe the U.S. government was involved in 9/11; do not believe a man landed on the moon; and don't vote. 66% of Americans check their phones 160 times a day; fear speaking their minds; and aren’t friends with their neighbors. 90% of Americans are satisfied with their personal life; don’t eat enough fruits & vegetables; and fear economic collapse. And 100% of Americans expect to get Coronavirus. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-23_979_american_statistics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-23_979_american_statistics.mp3 2:04 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Americans no Wed, 23 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor A review of the components of our personality is in order: People’s motives are easily explained by the physical incentive neurotransmitters provide. Positive emotions must have resulted from evolution because we all seem to have the same ones. Luckily, happiness is the most subjective of all emotions because there’s a lot of people who have nothing to be happy about. The smug satisfaction that comes from Virtue Signaling may be society’s greatest flaw. We are encouraged to form evermore memories by the dopamine high we get from remembering. Mindfulness is what babies are good at because they don’t have anything to mind but themselves. It’s the people who can’t earn respect themselves that insist it must be given to everyone freely. I’ve always wanted to be an Ubermensche but I could never learn to spell it. People are always coming up with ways to test your personality, but what they really wanted was an insight into their own. Terms such as “Dark Triad” are used to sully the reputations of successful people. Sympathy, empathy & compassion are actually a civilization-destroying trap. You’ve got to have a way to judge people because they’re certainly judging you. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-21_978_personality_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-21_978_personality_concepts.mp3 2:54 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, personality no Mon, 21 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Being nonjudgmental may be lauded in egalitarian circles but doing so in real-life isn't going to turn out best for your interests; if you don’t judge who you associate with, you’ll spend all your time cajoling, coddling, soothing, defending, and propping up other people at the expense of yourself. It’s better to only associate with people you admire & respect, so you’ll be admired & respected. But how good are you at judging people from what they type? Since nowadays most of the people you get to know are people you'll never meet in person, or even know what they really look like; old-time adages about not judging a book by its cover just don't apply; so how do you judge those people? As a strategy online, assume we usually judge people by your own discomforts: I don't like hearing about personal problems so I just Unfollow those people. There are also a lot of people who think I want to hear repetition a political party's talking points; I Unfriend those types. And then there are those that have a go at me personally; them I Block. I used to try and minimize my Blocking impulses, but as I've gotten older & wiser, I've given free-reign to my inner-Blocker; there's so many people online, that even if I was wrong in my judgment, there's plenty more where they came from; and all your Friends are judging you the same way. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-21_977_judging_people.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-21_977_judging_people.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, judging people, online no Sat, 19 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The ideological divide in America is mostly a sociological divide; trying to gain control over your own life, and possibly control over the lives of others. The ideology of meritocracy will naturally separate into the winners & losers, mathematically half on each side. In response, the losers espouse a competing ideology, egalitarianism, which would flip control to them if something like democracy gives them power to do so. Whereas meritocracy is objective, the other side perforce must be subjective, using feelings and demands to feel a certain way, as leverage; specifically the concepts of sympathy, empathy & compassion. As strategy, first the losing side redefines the words, or deemphasizes the ones that don't advance their goals while emphasizing the ones that provide them advantage. Humans all start with sympathy, which is probably evolutionary, where a person feels sorry for the plight of another, maybe even offering their help, which is called compassion. Highly emotional people are said to be sensitive, while victims are cast as suffering. Religious ideology is full of entreaties to help the destitute, maimed, weak, etc., ostensibly to gain access to heaven. Even though the mystical aspect of sympathy & compassion has lost its motivating power, modern Social Justice Warriors now demand such intervention, even make it legally obligatory; what better way for the losers to gain control than to force others to do their bidding based on subjective notions only the losers can judge? From that perspective comes the concept of empathy, which is like sympathy except instead the victim has the authority to claim you are not empathetic enough, and have no say in the matter. One of the greatest of ironies is that civilization could very well be destroyed by too much compassion. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-21_976_sympathy__empathy__compassion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-21_976_sympathy__empathy__compassion.mp3 3:10 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, sympathy, empathy, compassion no Thu, 17 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The field of Pop psychology is absolutely chock full of pseudoscience, mostly to prop up or justify the researcher’s personal deficiencies. It’s almost always a matter of applying disparaging labels; name-calling hiding behind post graduate degrees. There's no better example than when they throw around the concept of a dark triad. The Dark Triad is said to be composed of narcissism, Machiavellianism & psychopathy; which doesn’t sound unreasonable until the explicit definitions of those words comes to light. Basically, according to them, everyone who excels in the context of liberty, meritocracy & Protestant Work Ethic are charter members of the Dark Triad. A “narcissist” is what an unaccomplished person calls another person displaying pride in their achievements. Besides the envy & resentment aspects of those who use the label, their primary complaint is that narcissists aren’t spending enough time thinking about them; these are the same people who think ambition is ego. Also, be suspicious anytime you see the word “empathy” applied for or against anyone because that is the word unnoteworthy people use to make themselves the center of attention. Machiavellianism, as most people know is named after a famous wise author whose insights troubled the altruistic sensibilities of timid people, and means simply ignoring the artifices of morality. Morals are notoriously subjective, so whether one sees Machiavellain as a good or bad trait depends on who’s calling who what. The very fact that patience & calculation are considered signs of Machiavellianism is a clear indicator of the predispositions & prejudices of its detractors. These same people intentionally conflate sociopathy with psychopathy; the former is a sign of the highly capable, competent & conscientious among us, while the latter is a medically diagnoses for broken individuals who receive pleasure by hurting others. Since perversity is a trait that all these name-callers seem to share, taking pleasure in other’s misfortunes even when personally detrimental; it’s more likely the people calling other people psychopaths are the majority of psychopaths. Evidently, the darkest thing about the Dark Triad are the ones using the term. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-20_975_dark_triad.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-20_975_dark_triad.mp3 3:38 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, dark triad, narcissism, machiavellianism, psychopathy no Tue, 15 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Pop psychology personality tests have an almost addictive allure; you strongly suspect they're little more than horoscopes, but you tend to believe them anyway. Is there anyone on the Internet that hasn't taken one online that purports to tell you what kind of person you are? The two most well-known personality tests are Jung Type and Big Five, both of which are supposedly based on real studies, but the Style test is the most popular; you answer 105 agree-or-disagree questions, and it identifies your style out of 15 possible. Other tests are similar though the number the questions differ. The sheer number of personality tests is proof of their popularity, or at least the over-saturation of Psychology PhDs looking for publication, or maybe just space-fillers by people with too much time on their hands. Here is a partial list of online personality tests available: Communism, Authority, Orientation, Dark Core, Gender, DSM Style, Kinsey, Dark Triad, Feminism, Villain, Morality, Anger, Psychopath, Sexual, Lifetrap, Freud, Homophobia, IQ, EQ, Sexism, Faces, Transgender, Rorschach, Attachment, Narcissism, Conspiracy, Adversity, Abuse, Depression, Trump Derangement Syndrome, Chaos, ADHD, Stress, Eating, Perfection, Electability, Friends, Resilience, Breakup, Anxiety, Wealth, EvoPsych, Sizeism, PTSD, Typology, Car, Movie Star, Star Wars, Game of Thrones, Hogwarts, and my personal favorite, Winnie the Pooh, I wonder what kind of personality would take them all? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-20_974_personality_tests.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-20_974_personality_tests.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, personality test no Sun, 13 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche was the most insightful man in history, but he's been maligned for being too disturbing to read, and his Ubermensche concept was regrettably adopted by the Nazis. Ubermensche, which is German for “overman,” was the idea that humanity will eventually achieve full self-awareness. It comes down from the world's first philosopher, Zarathustra, founder of the world's first major world religion, Zoroastrianism, from which other major religions are derived: Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Bahá'í. Gnosticism and Greek philosophy. With a provenance like that, it's probable that striving to become an ubermensche may be the most important goal of every human; in fact, Nietzsche said “ The Ubermensch is the meaning of the earth.” How can something so cardinal be so unknown? The best way to describe an Ubermensche is to enumerate the goals: make your own values. Be selfish in strategic ways. Understand that suffering is a necessary component of good things. Understand that you will be hard to understand. Be gentle toward the weak out of consciousness of your own great strength. Don’t be too humble; delight in your own abilities; and lastly; become devoted to the Earth. Those are outstanding goals, and certainly make becoming an Ubermensch laudable; too bad the Nazi interpretation of becoming the literal overmen ruined it for everyone. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-20_973_ubermensche.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-20_973_ubermensche.mp3 2:44 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Ubermensche no Fri, 11 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor In the Male Dominance Hierarchy, the coin of the realm is respect; the more you have, the more control you have over your own life. And like coins, respect can be both given and received, but it must be earned, people aren’t owed respect. The most important kind of respect is self-respect because if you don’t respect yourself, you will not be respected by others either. Courtesy is the handmaiden of respect, and often substitutes for it. Respect is also an important component of personal identity and interpersonal relationships, because once respect is replaced by its opposite, contempt, a relationship is over, which very often leads to violence; so it’s not actually respect we have to be worried about, it’s disrespect. Unfortunately, respect has entered the realm of Social Justice: “People are due respect for the simple fact of being people. Equality is in balance.” If everyone supposedly has respect then no one has, which totally negates its personalized value. Since the word has been lost to mysticism, it’s important to replace it in our consciousness because real respect is very important. We could use one of the synonyms of respect in its place; perhaps “regard,” or “deference,” “honor,” maybe even “admiration?” However, the best word to use would be “esteem,” which is even closer to what we want; the sense of a person’s worth. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-19_972_respect.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-19_972_respect.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, respect no Wed, 09 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There's a lot of words out there that originate in Metaphysics, the opposite of physics, which means they can mostly be ignored; one, however, "mindfulness," comes up repeatedly. The definition is a little hazy; it's either an entreaty to focus on what you're doing now and ignore the complexity of life around you so as not to be overwhelmed, or it means to prevent thoughts of the past from tainting your experience of the present; both descriptions seem appropriate & important to psychological well-being. The term apparently originates in Buddhism, part of the Eightfold path to Enlightenment, an ingredient of meditation, putting all thoughts out of your head except for your immediate perceptions and feelings. Mindfulness is also used in the practice of medicine as a cure for mental & physical illness: patients with pain are instructed to ignore it by instead intensely focusing on other bodily sensations. People who experience intense anxiety, due to dwelling on embarrassing or traumatic events in their past, are taught to assiduously fixate on their life right now. And there’s the “don’t be judgmental” component of mindfulness that would obviously benefit society. It seems mindfulness, as a concept, has lots of uses. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-19_971_mindfulness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-19_971_mindfulness.mp3 2:15 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, mindfulness, pain no Mon, 07 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor One of the things that separates human beings from animals is extensive memories. Animals have memory, sometimes long ones, but not at the same level as humans; a lot of our intellect is remembering things. Humans want to remember, they desire to remember, they get positive reinforcement by remembering because memory cells are literally bathed in dopamine, the mind's feel good drug. Every time you remember, you derive pleasure from it. It's easy to understand that as humans evolved, those that got a dopamine hit from remembering something, especially something important, wanted to do it again, and again, and again, until the human brain became more a repository for memories than the calculating machine it’s often imagined to be. Memories are the real reason brain beats brawn. The reason the music you grew up makes you feel good but new music doesn't, is because there are no preexisting memory pathways in the brain to stimulate pleasure. The more you hear a particular song, the more pleasurable it becomes. Similar sounding music can stimulate a lot of the same pathways; that's why you can say one song sounds a lot like another, symbiotically generating dopamine. Imagine early humans beating drums, dancing for hours around a fire in wild abandon, high on the repeating rhythm of the drums, where every beat pumped a tiny bit more dopamine & adrenaline into their brains, ultimately collapsing into sexual ecstasy, and it's not hard to understand why homo sapiens were so successful as a species; it’s all due to memory. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-19_970_memory.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-19_970_memory.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, memory, music no Sat, 05 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Virtue is one of those words that requires people who share the same values to discuss because it uses morality in its definition. Similarly, its opposite, vice, has no universal meaning; what may be a vice to some is virtuous to others. Like all the foundational human motives, virtue is a result of chemical interactions in your brain; it triggers a dopamine release. When you are indoctrinated with morals as a child; pathways in your brain are created, and as an adult, when electrical signals traverse those motor-neurons, the stimulation is pleasurable. People are virtuous because it makes them feel good. The interesting thing about virtue is that it doesn’t require any action; just thinking about it is enough; this is why the practice of Virtue Signaling is so prevalent among those without enough self-awareness to know that they are actually being selfish; they are looking for the pleasure of dopamine for no other reason than self-gratification. It would seem that it couldn't get anymore selfish than that but the exploitation doesn’t stop there, the closely related feeling of sanctimony, people finding moral laxity in other people for their own selfish pleasure, is even worse. Virtue is the most abused of all the human emotions. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-18_969_virtue.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-18_969_virtue.mp3 2:09 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, virtue no Thu, 03 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There is nothing more subjective than happiness, which is probably why it has the most amount of trite cliches to describe it: contentment, pleasure, satisfaction, cheerfulness, gaiety, joy, joviality, glee, blitheness, carefreeness, gladness, delight, good spirits, light-heartedness, good cheer, well-being, enjoyment, felicity, exuberance, exhilaration, elation, ecstasy, delirium, jubilation, rapture, bliss, euphoria, beatitude, delectation, jouissance, and it goes on. In fact, there’s an entire pseudo-scientific field of “happiness” literature that appears from the outside to be legitimate, but looking into it makes an objective person shake their head. It’s part of the anti-scientific principles movement currently underway by people who wish to make science about them. Supposed science conducted by biased researchers interviewing biased subjects about their biased feelings can’t possibly turn out well, but the motives are actually more sinister than just getting paid for sloppy, unsupervised work that generates unwarranted acclaim; the actual goal of happiness research is to upend the political order. Existing Western values focus on ambition, meritocracy & accomplishment, and a lot of people, by definition, half, those below the average, fair poorly under those conditions. It’s to every loser’s benefit to change the rules to benefit them, and nothing is more compelling for change than being able to determine the values which produce the most happiness. What good is walking on the moon if you’re not happy about it? The question is easy enough to answer: any feeling that can be generated by sniffing cocaine or shooting heroin shouldn’t be one that guides society. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-18_968_happiness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-18_968_happiness.mp3 2:55 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, happiness no Tue, 01 Jun 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It may be disappointing to know that we act only as a result of chemistries in our brain but the human body isn’t magical, there must be something that controls the inner-workings of our complicated lives. Rather than dwell on the mechanics, it's more productive to identify the positive emotions built on that reality: there's our optimism, hopefulness and confidence about the future, and the successful outcome of the tasks we perform to stay alive; there's compassion, which is the sympathy, pity & concern we have for the sufferings & misfortunes of others; and there's our ambition; the desire & determination for achievement. It's not so much that we have these positive emotions, it's how they manifest themselves as charity, voluntary giving of help to those in need; love, which is the comfort & affection we give to those around us; and ingenuity, the creative & essential inventions we use in solving problems. All of these things are absolutely required for human beings to exist; without any one of them, the species would fail. The same cannot be said for the negative emotions of fear, envy, anger & resentment, which manifest themselves as passive-aggressiveness, spite, perversity & vindictiveness. It's not so clearcut how these things contribute to the advancement of humans; let's hope the positive emotions win out. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-18_967_positive_emotions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-18_967_positive_emotions.mp3 2:15 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, emotions no Sun, 30 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor We are biological robots; everything we do is motivated by a neurotransmitter stimulating some part of our brain. David Hume, one of the Scottish philosophers so important to The Enlightenment, postulated on this in the mid-1700s; he thought that passion rather than reason governed human behavior; that we were only a bundle of causally-connected perceptions. Because the incentive mechanisms of neurotransmitters had not yet been discovered, Hume's thesis had to use contorted rhetoric to explain its operation, but he was on the right track. We now know everything we do is motivated, or rather incentivized, by neurotransmitters; evolution's way of causing the human species to survive since we do not have instinct. Everything we think we do out of reason, we do because we seek the inner-reward of tiny molecules passing into nerve endings, specifically: a dose of serotonin that comes from accomplishment, the dopamine high from altruism, adrenaline pressures us to alleviate anxiety to ourselves or something we cherish, and testosterone provides the impetus for violence, aggression & lust. The reality is, people don't do things because of the inspiration of noble thoughts, but instead because of a primeval drug addiction. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-17_966_neurotransmitters__incentive.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-17_966_neurotransmitters__incentive.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Hume, instinct, neurotransmitters no Fri, 28 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Society is too important to leave unsubsidized; let's review: By many definitions, we're already in a depression. The attraction for Universal Basic Income is too powerful to overcome. Most people don't understand why work is so important to a functional society. The solution to housing the homeless is almost entirely a matter of legal changes. “Saving lives” is the cover used by authoritarians because it tops the sanctimony scale. Boomers may be the last generation to experience the greatest of America. Society's responsibility includes subsidizing the things its people need. A job is too important not to have, even if government has to subsidize it. Whoever is responsible for children controls the direction of society. Schooling should be subsided by government but it should not be government-operated. How government funds education is almost as important as the education. Mandatory charity is used to mask negative motivations deleterious to society. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-17_965_subsidized_society_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-17_965_subsidized_society_concepts.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, society, subsidize no Wed, 26 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Altruism is genetic, and it's the source of people's profound desire to help other people and other creatures when they see them in need because altruists get personal satisfaction from their charitable actions. Some people even feel altruistic towards things, and become their protectors & custodians, hence the allure of the environmental movement. This is a fundamental human emotion, obviously based in evolution since it seems to be integral to a successful society, at least in the form of charity, which is voluntary. Unfortunately, altruism easily turns into egalitarianism, which turns charity into an obligation. An egalitarian society intends to make all people equal, primarily at the expense of other people. It turns charity into a right; those in need can make demands on another's resources or ability. There are many examples in the past to demonstrate the results of that kind of reversal of responsibility; society will sink to its lowest common denominator: achievement is minimized, meritocracy demonized, and ambition denigrated. Obviously, it's not charity causing these things, but the other evolution-derived traits of envy, covetousness & resentment, which hide behind charity. It's interesting that when charity is viewed as voluntary, it advances society, but when it becomes mandatory, it destroys it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-17_964_charity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-17_964_charity.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, charity, egalitarian no Mon, 24 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Mention “schools,” and everyone always thinks teachers, classrooms & buses. Those things are very expensive, partially, if not completely, because they are government-run, which means political. Everywhere there’s lots of money combined with sanctimony, especially with no one keeping tabs, exploitation runs rampant: public schools, and their tremendously powerfully teachers unions and toady school boards, are possibly the biggest example of this. The best solution for the problem has been known for decades: vouchers, where every student is given an allotment of government money to apply to whatever learning institution or method they want that works best for them. In the beginning, most students will probably still select traditional schooling but a lot will choose a modern alternative technique for learning, which more students will adopt as the advantages become apparent. Funding vouchers is just as important a consideration for such a total re-haul of education. Currently, local property taxes & levees pay for schools, but that's a regressive form of taxation, meaning everybody pays the same, no matter their income; regressive taxes concentrate wealth to the wealthy. Instead, subsidize or supplant that with increased federal grants, which already cover about 10% of education's cost. Federal money comes from progressive taxation, meaning from people who have lots of money. However, we do have to be careful because there's the problem of perverse incentives: when prisons were converted in this way, they began advocating for more prisoners, and public building project bids are sometimes burdened with ideological motives or cronyism; so we’ll have to keep an eye out for such exploitation of vouchers. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-16_963_government-funded_education.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-16_963_government-funded_education.mp3 2:50 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, vouchers, regressive, progressive, funding, education, schools no Sat, 22 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It's in society's interest to ensure citizens are educated, at least so that they can interact with others and with business; to be able to take care of themselves with the least amount of government intervention. What form that education takes is immaterial; there's no reason students should be forced to a particular timetable, location, grouped by age, or forced to engage in propaganda they disapprove of. Making all of those things choices means the best way to handle education is with Markets because education is a product. There's no reason for government to be in the education business; in fact, it's dangerous, as proven by the shift in only one generation from liberty to egalitarianism which was only possible because of public indoctrination in schools. The virus lockdowns proved that education can be done in people’s homes, no need for traditional brick & mortar buildings, classrooms, textbooks, police, hall monitors, and exploitation by public employee unions. Education can demonstrably be accommodated by Market Forces so why is it still being run by government? Of course, government is responsible for funding schools, and just like infrastructure, that responsibility should be performed by private companies because it can be. Government-subsidized schooling rather than government-run schooling would focus on the students rather than the system. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-16_962_subsidize_schooling.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-16_962_subsidize_schooling.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, education, schools, schooling, subsidize no Thu, 20 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Children are incredibly resilient, obviously an evolutionary trait. Children live in an imaginary world because the real world hasn't sunk in yet. Every kid is happy by default; the naivete of childhood is a protective cloak that insulates them from the outside world; except in extreme cases, they doesn't know if they're poor or that their family life is chaos. The traditional family, one where parents are responsible for their children, has worked pretty much the same since the species began. Egalitarian attempts to raise children communally exist, most recently in the former Soviet Union, but those experiments didn't produce remarkably more successful or advanced societies; quite the opposite, in fact. It seems a child can live in a village but it doesn't take a village to raise a child. Society does, however, have responsibility for children. First & foremost, a society's primary purpose is to perpetuate itself, and that takes children, so anything that promotes children is fundamentally a good thing. Secondly, children eventually become society, so its values & ideals needs to be indoctrinated into them young. Unfortunately, today children are taught to be fearful of everything: climate, viruses, even being called names; how could they not turn into desultory, disgruntled & dissatisfied adults. Who was responsible for that? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-16_961_who_is_responsible_for_children.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-16_961_who_is_responsible_for_children.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, society, children no Tue, 18 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It's not enough to subsidize employees; to keep as many people working as possible, government needs to subsidize jobs too, much like it did during the Great Depression. Programs were created by Executive Order by President Roosevelt in 1933 in times very similar to these: Emergency Conservation Work, Civilian Conservation Corps, Works Progress Administration, National Youth Administration, Development of the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the quaint, Camps for Unemployed Women. At that time, as now, young people had lost confidence in their government, and more worrisome, they had lost their faith in liberty because liberty requires both freedom & opportunity, but opportunity was lacking. The problem back then was a lackluster economy, while today the problem is the people’s lack of personal focus, and sense of having no control over their life. Public works give people a feeling of accomplishment & personal value, not to mention patriotism. Jobs are way more valuable to society than a means of transferring money from The Rich to everyone else; jobs instill Work Ethic. Everyone should be expected to work in some fashion, and that requires closely-managed, low-end jobs that don't make sense unless all of the benefits to society are added together. Also, if you work, even if your salary is subsidized by government, nobody's going to tell you what to do, but if you don’t work, just sitting around collecting free money, then you can be sure other folks will be telling you how to spend it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-15_960_subsidize_jobs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-15_960_subsidize_jobs.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, subsidize, jobs, liberty, opportunity no Sun, 16 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor A society isn't things, and most of the things in society are optional; people need way less than they consume, and the things they consume are ephemeral too. The reason consumerism is encouraged is that modern society has enough productivity to satisfy the basic needs of every person in it, with a lot of productivity left over. If people didn't consume the non-essential things that other people produce, there would be no need for their effort. Living like the Amish could solve that problem but then no one would be exploring, innovating, discovering, and certainly not landing on the moon. If the human psyche was satisfied with video games, fast food & working on their novel, society could add those simple things to its list of essentials and be done with it; but people need goals, they need ambition, they need success & failure, or they get restless & dissatisfied. It doesn't take long for aimless protests in the streets demanding ever more esoteric things. The question is: what do people do? Traditionally, people were employed in manufacturing, so getting those jobs back, even if it requires a subsidy, is important. However, even then, robots are supposed to take everyone's job, but Amazon is fully automated yet people still shop & eat where other people are, so the service industry obviously isn't going anywhere. Talk of an Information society has been around for a few decades but it turned out to be nothing doing nothing; people need to feel what they’re doing is something, or at least feel the time between what they are doing is something; therefore, society needs to subsidize parks, art, concerts, fairs, celebrations, and promotion of jobs workers can be proud of doing, whatever the cost. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-15_959_subsidize_society.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-15_959_subsidize_society.mp3 2:48 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, society, subsidize no Fri, 14 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The word “Boomer” has become an icon for a time in history when life seemed, in retrospect, to be idyllic. Boomers are mocked for their optimism, enthusiasm & positive, go-getter attitudes, but that's more out of envy than belief. No other generation can do better than Boomers as a whole; those times are past. Boomer is obviously more a concept than it is an actual time period during which people were born, but there were some distinct aspects of life that created the Boomer attitude. As a Boomer, we thought getting an education in anything but STEM was a waste, and following your muse was unrealistic. When I grew up, I couldn’t wait to get out of my parent’s cramped house, but my children had multiple rooms and learned to drive stick in a Ferrari. Generations now simply can’t compete so they made new goals, and per Nietzsche's concept of Slave Morality, their goals are the opposite of their Boomer parents: because Boomers believe in liberty, meritocracy & patriotism, what their children want is egalitarianism; since Boomers were high-income consumers who lived in the suburbs, Millennials disdain money & things, and live packed together in cities. Boomers are individualists who think they got where they were by their own efforts, which is only partway true because Boomers had more opportunity and less restrictions. Boomers are poor at self-awareness because they never had to think of anything else, but they were the most creative & pioneering because they could be. A saying of Boomers is that “the world is your oyster,” but what possible sense does that make now? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-15_958_boomers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-15_958_boomers.mp3 2:48 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Boomers, Boomer no Wed, 12 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Sanctimony can justify anything, and make the sanctimoaner feel good at the same time. The sanctimonious holy grail is “saving lives.” There's no defense to that claim because it isn't logical; if it was then simple comparisons would be persuasive; for example, what about outlawing bathtubs because they're among the Top 10 causes of injuries & death? Choking is another big hazard, so should only soup be allowed? Would you give your car away if you knew there would be no fatal auto accidents? Not to mention childbirth, which is dangerous in its own right? Obviously, extending out the analogy, there would be absolutely no injury & death if there were no people. Illogic & hypocrisy rule in Saving Lives World: the irony of Defund the Police occurring simultaneously with mandatory masks is staggering; or massive BLM rallies but people can't go to church; or being forced into lockdown to save hospitals but hospitals closing because there are no patients. The list is endless, frustrating & maddening. When “saving lives” trumps conscientiousness, it leaves the world devoid of liberty, and smelling like the Middle Ages. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-14_957_saving_lives.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-14_957_saving_lives.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, saving lives no Mon, 10 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It's odd that we, as a society, will let people sleep in tents under bridges, or sleep in church parking lots, but let regulations and building codes keep them out of empty buildings? It’s actually a problem of being over-civilized. Here's what would be required to use vacant commercial space for temporary housing: 1) No liability. The owners of the building have to be totally insulated. 2) No regulations. Bureaucrats would have to be put on a short leash. 3) The place has to be run like an army barracks to provide a sense of order for chaotic lives. 4) It has to be a true charity, not a non-profit that profits the supposed rescuers. 5) Make it easy to donate to, including expired or homemade food. These are all difficult but solvable issues, however, self-righteous, sanctimonious indignation seems to be the biggest stumbling block for providing shelter to people who really need it; the problem is who wants to be the one blamed for pictures of kids sleeping under Space Blankets on the bare tile floors of an abandoned shopping mall. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-14_956_homeless_housing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-14_956_homeless_housing.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, homeless, housing no Sat, 08 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor In the days when people worked to survive, they consumed barely less than they produced. That ratio has progressively moved up so that in modern times, the productivity of 1 person supports 5 people. The question isn't how high can that ratio go, which seems limitless with robots and new technology on the horizon; what's important is why should people work at all? The vast majority of people wouldn’t work if they didn’t have to; the equatorial nations of easy food and temperate weather are proof of that. Without threat to life or comfort, people don’t work past life’s necessities; laziness & sloth are apparently the human default. For several generations, people worked to obtain status & self-gratification but those are subjective & ephemeral things, and require a society that promotes them. When all physical things are universally available, and society no longer fosters a need for conformity, the only viable motive to work would be personal ambition, but that's a difficult trait to understand. Testosterone plays a significant role in making men ambitious & aggressive, but animals have testosterone, and they don't build cities or land on the moon. None of the egalitarian traits of equality, sympathy & envy promote those things either. Inner fulfillment is more religion than fact. Luckily, the primal motivation for men is mating; high status leads to scoring the hottest babes, so men work to increase their status; sex is what makes the wheels go round. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-14_955_why_work.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-14_955_why_work.mp3 2:33 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, work, productivity, consumption, testosterone, ambition no Thu, 06 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Universal Basic Income, or UBI, as odious as it may be, is an idea whose time as come, and it will only gain ground as there are fewer & fewer jobs untrained people can do. In fact, it's gained academic credibility, and even some presidential candidates have begun basing their campaigns on it; who doesn't want free money? Plus, payments during the virus Lockdown started the ball rolling; it's going to be difficult to pull back from that, especially during distressed economic times. UBI removes the need to work; besides the consumption vs. production problem, it's psychologically unhealthy. There's a long history of free money with Social Security and Disability, but those normally go to older people who have already had full lives. Young people require purpose; a sense of mission & accomplishment. A society of drones, all feeling entitled & complacent, can't possibly last long because there's nothing worse than the restlessness of the idle. Entertainment is simply a distraction, it doesn't lead to satisfaction; soon, bored & unfulfilled folks will be protesting for something, anything, just to give their lives meaning, however trivial, however counterproductive, however perverse. There's nothing more dangerous to civilization than hordes of privileged youth with nothing to do. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-13_954_ubi_is_coming.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-13_954_ubi_is_coming.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, UBI, dangerous no Tue, 04 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Since money is imaginary and can be produced as needed, poor financial metrics are not the best definition of a “depression.” It’s also difficult to get out of the mindset that a depression should have soup lines, but those have been replaced by Welfare checks. Another traditional indicator of a depression is how many people aren't working, now 37%, over a third of the population; approximately the same percent of as during depressions of the past, but again, imaginary money masks that indicator too. The biggest sign that a country is in a depression is when it begins to flirt with Collectivism; when ambition is unrewarded and motivation is lacking. Collectivism surges when people think they can do better by redistributing wealth than they can by creating wealth of their own. If anything, the populist attraction to egalitarianism, the basis of Marxism, is bigger now than during The Great Depression. A depression also fosters extreme partisanship, wealth concentration, and unreliable news sources; all of which we are experiencing right now. But the most telling indicator is the general lack of optimism; the less optimism, the deeper the depression. However, it’s interesting how Tent cities seem to be an established fixture of depression, no matter the age. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-13_953_were_already_in_a_depression.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-13_953_were_already_in_a_depression.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, depression, signs no Sun, 02 May 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Not enough emphasis is placed on properly debating online so let's review: Debating is not for the feint of heart nor those with fragile egos. There's a few tips every debater should know or you'll be the newbie. You only need warned once about the pitfalls of debating because they repeat themselves. It's fun to be able to name the common debate fallacies. Not all debate techniques work with all debates. Argument From Authority no longer works now that Google is the ultimate authority. All debates devolve into name-calling eventually. Trolling can be as satisfying to do as it is infuriating to experience. Brigading is highly effective at stifling debate and it's easy. Masculine debate identifies who the males in the room are. Debate by 1000 Cuts is both subtle and lethal. Debating on Facebook is a poor second but sometimes there's no place else to go. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-13_952_debate_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-13_952_debate_concepts.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate, debating no Fri, 30 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Online debate forums are obscure, and Twitter limits length, so most “debate,” if it can be called that, occurs on Facebook. Debating on Facebook is a chore because memes make up the bulk of the posts, name-calling is ubiquitous, and people you would ignore in real-life often take over a thread from sheer stupidity. However, if you should want to use Facebook for debating, first get enough Friends so that there's always someone who will reply to your posts. Hopefully, those Friends will be someone you don’t mind losing as a friend, or they’re close enough to remain courteous & respectful, but don’t ever rely on that. Make a statement of fact, or fiction as the case may be, and let the chips fall. If you don’t want to mess up your own feed with budding enemies but still want the thrill of the conflict, you can always go trolling. First, follow good etiquette and don’t get too sharp on someone's Homepage, that's when spouses & family will really take personal offense; you should be looking for entertainment, not making enemies. Instead wait for topic to enter your feed and respond to that; you’ll just be one of dozens of semi-anonymous posters, and you can always stop posting if it gets too hot. Don’t contribute to the frenzy by calling people names, and if you're going to imply something, keep it subtle, but not too subtle, you are debating on Facebook. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-12_951_debating_on_facebook.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-12_951_debating_on_facebook.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate, debating, Facebook no Wed, 28 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Keep cutting with a razorblade and eventually the oak will fall; even the weakest of debate positions can be won with tenacity & perseverance. Longterm debaters, especially in the political realm, practice Debate by 1000 Cuts. Our political structure is such that issues can be won or lost because it seems too petty, contentious, or tedious to pursue: for example, somebody doesn't like guns so they constantly insist on gun-control. The people who want guns say nothing, they think they've got The Constitution on their side, but the cuts keep coming and coming and coming. Regardless how silly or illogical, a few people convinced at a time will eventually add up to 51%. Climate Change is another of these cut-cut-cut strategies: the Climate Changers don't debate any real solutions, they just continually harangue & fearmonger children about the end of the world. Most of it's nonsense but if you should offhandedly agree with something they are promoting, just to be courteous or fair, next thing, Carbon Trading. “Racism” has also entered the pantheon of cutting horrors; endless trolls repeating the same tired slogans. They’re obviously centrally financed and organized, their tactic transparently one of endless cutting, and if no one pushes back, you will again be judged by the color of your skin rather than the content of your character. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-12_950_debate_by_1000_cuts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-12_950_debate_by_1000_cuts.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate, climate change, gun control, racism no Mon, 26 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor In my debating experience, which is formidable, the most caustic, hysterical & threatening debate competitors are male. Females may be insulting & antagonistic but they rarely resort to serious name-calling; they may say you’re narcissistic, stupid, or immature but that’s about the extent of their verbal arsenal. Males, on-the-other-hand, will go right at the core of your self-respect; insinuating that you are a liar, cheat, or even a pedophile. Another masculine debate trait is endurance, a male will not back down, and will not let go; they will even stalk you across threads, something females never do. Whatever the controversy about transism, the ability for biological men to call themselves women, the easiest way to tell online is simply by debating them: biological males, those who grew up with testosterone flowing through their veins, are much more aggressive in their debating technique than biologic females. Another male can recognize masculinity from their lifelong experience in the Male Dominance Hierarchy, which females can’t mimic, or at least, don’t want to. To defeat a transwoman in a debate about transwomen is to first state that men are bullies; the transwoman will agree with you; then continue the debate about the biological differences between men & women. Remain calm but insistent, and when it’s clear that your opponent is bullying you, responding like a man, point it out. A transwoman who is invested in their new sexual identity will recognize the truth of that revelation and immediately disappear. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-12_949_masculine_debate.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-12_949_masculine_debate.mp3 2:49 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, transwomen, debate, masculine no Sat, 24 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Social Media is defined by plagues of brigaders swarming any idea they disagree with and destroying it’s credibility & impact. Brigading is a coordinated troll attack; popular because everyone can do it, knowledge or intelligence not required; it's easy, just click what they tell you; and there's a dopamine reward, usually from virtue signaling but perversity often plays a part. The most famous brigading groups are the online knitting circles; thousands of women who initially started out knitting together but eventually became a force to be reckoned with by all posting together, what became know as a Twitter mob. And that's not counting the thousands, even tens-of-thousands, of coordinated bots. In fact, bots account for more retweeting and message ranking than real users. Entire Twitter Storms can be nothing but bots on either side. There are several methods of brigading: going to the homepage of a political candidate and typing a scripted disparaging message en mass. There’s ratioing, where Dislikes of a post far outweigh the Likes or retweets. There’s UpVoting which takes activist posts to the top of the feed, to the first page where everyone can see them, and DownVoting things they don’t like to bury that idea though obscurity Even online Buyer Reviews of products are completely open to manipulation, so-much-so that they've become more a weapon than a resource; for example, a Trump campaign App will get a quarter million negative user reviews, dozens by each brigader; the numbers so big that no amount of positive real reviews could make any difference. Trying to continuing a message every fifth post, surrounded by brigader invective, is not a successful strategy; brigaders always win. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-11_948_brigading.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-11_948_brigading.mp3 2:50 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, brigading, twitter mob, bots, twitter storm, ratioing, upvoting no Thu, 22 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Outside of actually changing someone's mind, which never happens, trolling is the most satisfying of all debating tactics. The word “troll” has a bad connotation, people who call names or post nonsense to disrupt a debate, but if trolling is done properly, no one even knows they were trolled. The word comes from fishing, hanging a line with a piece of juicy bait, off the back of the boat then puttering around trying to hook a fish. Crude trolls are obviously trying to start trouble, but an Epic Troll can actually make a point; people will engage with an Epic Troll honestly because they don’t seem adversarial. To pull it off, the Epic Troll cannot leave character; they must appear to be sincere at all times, insidiously peppering the debate with truth that the other side doesn't like to admit, or has never considered. A well-crafted troll is more convincing than a straight-forward argument because there's no rubbing against ego & spite; you appear to be on their side; trolling is a way to bring epiphany to otherwise insightful people. You know you've won when no one responds any longer, even though no anger was present. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-11_947_trolling.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-11_947_trolling.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, troll, epic troll, trolling no Tue, 20 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor You're going to get called names while debating. If you respond by getting angry, you lose. If you try to defend yourself, you lose, and though Blocking people admits defeat, if a name-caller persists, you may have to. There's only two ways to handle name-calling: first & easiest, ignore them; just let the name-calling posts scroll by without responding, even if there's an alluring tidbit embedded in them, because once you've legitimized a post by responding to it, you've incorporated the slur into your reputation. The other way to handle insults is the most fun but you've got to be a troll at heart, and have a lot of self-confidence; simply admit to whatever the accusation is. The most common insults in an SJW world are the easiest to absorb: “Yes, I’m a racist, homophobe, xenophobe, misogynist Russian sympathizer.” This tactic even works against brigading, but whatever real thing you might have wanted to say is gone. You've got to sacrifice what might have been a productive line of debate but it's actually kind of funny: “Yes, I'm a moron. I’m a vile, perverted sicko. I’m off my meds. I’m a loser. I’m stupid.” This kind of response, made right after the slur, very often shuts the name-caller up entirely, and there's a chance you could continue debating, but if not, just keep the game going: “Hehe. I'm a donkey. I'm a boot-licking freak. I'm going to get a MAGA hat. I’m a traitor. I'm going to become a Communist & move to Russia. I’m both retarded and have a small penis.” Admit to all the invective, they don't repeat; soon people will see what you're doing and stop; wait a bit after all is quiet then make one final post to rub salt in the wound: “Wasn’t hard to own this thread.” politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-11_946_name-calling.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-11_946_name-calling.mp3 2:52 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, SJW, debate, name-calling no Sun, 18 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Argumentum Ad Verecundiam, Appeal To Authority, is the common debating tactic of invoking an expert to prove you're correct; linking to an article is how it's normally practiced online. It's also a major source of shutting you down via the sanctimony of so-called “fact checking:” you make a statement then somebody throws up a couple links that imply you're uninformed, wrong, or a liar. Today's Google culture has made everyone an expert: Google scientists, Google lawyers, and even Google doctors, abound. If you should be an actual scientist, lawyer, or doctor, don't expect any added credibility for your argument; it can be dismissed with a single link that purports to prove you wrong. The underlying assumption is that no one is any more of an expert on anything than anyone else. The only way to combat this lack of respect for authority is to first deny links as a presumptive trump card. Declare that since any side of any issue has supporting links, all linking is useless. Make the assertion that since all external authority is suspect, and all debates eventually boil down to your opinion vs. my opinion, let’s only rank our own opinions; state you are a doctor, lawyer, whatever, and expect them to be the same, or they should concede. They won't, of course, they'll use an Ad Hominem attack, cast Suspicion, and begin to Bully you, but anyone reading the thread will grant you your authority and a win. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-10_945_argument_from_authority.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-10_945_argument_from_authority.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate, Appeal To Authority, Argumentum Ad Verecundiam, no Fri, 16 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Debate has gone on as long as more than one human gathered together, and after evolving past Might-Makes-Right, some traditional debating strategies emerged to beat an opponent with words; for example, Aristotle's Reductio Ad Absurbum, which means Appeal To Extremes, a method of proving the falsity of a premise by showing that its logical consequence is absurd or contradictory. There is also Argumentum Ad Logicam, Argument From Fallacy, showing that an argument contains an error, therefore its conclusion must be false: i.e. if P then Q but if P is fallacious then Q is false. As venerable, clever & effective as those strategies are, most debates descend into chaos rather quickly, especially if they're successful. More often, Ab Absurdo, Appeal To Mockery & Ridicule, is used, which presents an opponent's argument as absurd, ridiculous, or humorous, and therefore not worthy of serious consideration; but that’s still being relatively civil... Social Media-based debate descends well below courtesy: name-calling and ad hominem attacks are most often used. They're simple and effective because they either drive off the other party, put them on the defensive, or cause them to get angry; all of which are wins. Other’s go after your reputation: if you claim some kind of authority, they’ll undermine it by asking for ever more detailed proof; there's no expertise so great that they can't imply that someone else is smarter; and if one person is more of an expert, then you must be a second rate fraud. The really caustic ones go after a person's reputation at every opportunity, implying they're pedophiles or homosexuals. You’ll get to know your adversaries, which is odd to consider since you'll never personally meet any of them; in fact, it's best they’re essentially anonymous because the relationship is one based on contempt, disgust & disrespect. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-10_944_debate_techniques.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-10_944_debate_techniques.mp3 3:05 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate, debating technique no Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It doesn't take long in an online debate before someone calls you names, or tries to attack you personally; that's called an Ad Hominem attack. Though amateurish, it's an effective tactic because most people will try and defend themselves, and that's a hole they can't climb out of; best to ignore it. Also, your opponent will often try to misrepresent your position, “so you're saying you kill babies;” that's called a “straw man” because they've replaced you with their caricature of you. Other named debating fallacies are Special Pleading, Confusion of Correlation and Causation, Anecdotal Evidence & Appeal to Authority. Here's a list of common debate fallacies that aren't specifically named, so I did.   There's “Casting Suspicion;” implying that your opponent's pov is tainted in some way; and a person using a false pretext concealing their real intentions is known as “Trolling.” A “Disingenuous” debater is not candid nor sincere. “Accusations” are claiming the opponent has done something wrong, putting them on the defensive. “Dismissive” is insinuating that the person or argument is unworthy of consideration. “Bullying” is ridicule, belittlement & scorn. “Ganging Up” is when multiple opponents target you, and “Brigading” is when they're organized. Some opponents are intentionally “Obtuse,” repeating a false or illogical narrative despite proof otherwise. Often people assume “Facts Not In Evidence” or have a “Presumption” that the central premise has already been established. The worst is when you get “Stalked;” a person making derogatory comments after everything you post. And you probably already know it, but I'll repeat Godwin's Law: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-10_943_debate_fallacies.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-10_943_debate_fallacies.mp3 3:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate, debate fallacies no Mon, 12 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Real debating, not that namby-pamby fluff in high school, is not for the faint-of-heart; the requirements are thick skin, controlled anger, and the optimism that you will eventually prevail, or at least exit the fray with your honor & reputation intact. Here are some things to be warned of: First, avoid staged debates against people whose main tactic is one of accusation, belittlement, scorn, and dismissiveness. If one of these people interrupt a positive debate, ignore them; certainly don’t respond to them, thereby surrendering control of the discussion. If they get abusive, pointedly ask them to leave. If they won’t go away, Block them. In the worst possible case where the interloper has co-opted all productive discussion, discontinue your participation. One-on-one debating with a weak or ill-prepared opponent might seem like it would result in an easy victory, but if the opponent finds an accomplice that also insists the world is flat, then no amount of logical discussion will dissuade them, and even more Flat-Earthers will brigade you; leave the debate. Some people debate as if their words have value on their own accord, with no factual evidence or personal authority. These folks claim "common sense,” or age, or some kind of inborn special knowledge, and they are oblivious to how pedestrian their arguments sound to other people; it's the difference between a pontificator and debater; the solution is to leave the debate. And if you are making an ass of yourself, leave the debate. Am I making my point here...? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-09_942_debate_warnings.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-09_942_debate_warnings.mp3 2:42 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate, strategy, warning no Sat, 10 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The goal of debating is to entertain yourself, and probably others, because it's a rare thing to ever change anybody's mind. If you're just getting started, here's a few debating tips: First, you need a point then support your point with some facts; personal anecdotes or authority help but you might get trumped by someone with more. Second; stay on a winning thread, meaning don't pursue points you've obvious lost. Follow multiple threads so that you don't fixate on just one; being too invested ruins your enjoyment; There's often two or three items under discussion in the same thread or even in the same post, but keep focused so you are only engaging one at a time. If you do want to take them all on, make bullet points so that each can be addressed individually. Third; keep your posts short; nobody's going to read a wall of text, and they will intentionally miss your most important point if it's a winner. And lastly, go ahead and get excited but post as if you're calm; practiced debaters can smell blood over the Internet. It's tough to debate someone who thinks completely differently than you, so avoid them, but there are going to be people who are receptive to your point-of-view; take them through the steps of your argument, find where you first disagree and begin your debate from there. Chances are an open-minded person will see your logic, possibly admire it, and maybe continue further exploration at another time, because online debates can go on for months, years even. Watch out to only use an insult if you want return punches. Most of all, don't take it personally, or you lose. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-09_941_debate_tips.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-09_941_debate_tips.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate, internet, online, tips no Thu, 08 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor A lot of people don't really know what debating is; they have some vague notion of young men in bow ties making points of order, or panels of political partisans yelling over each other, but the denizens of the Internet, Social Media specifically, have turned debate into a sport. Sometimes, very rarely, somebody actually changes their mind, but the entertainment and the fun is in the contest of rhetoric, logic & personalities involved. There are no special requirements to debate; you don’t have to be especially intelligent, knowledgeable, or even know what you’re talking about; you only need thick skin. Many Newbies, not familiar with online debating, begin with an awkwardly post, get embarrassed & insulted, and leave before they ever get a chance to learn how to engage. They are under the impression they have to win, but highly sophisticated debaters often take the other side of an issue just for the fun of it. Clever rhetoric will beat out logic every time; after some experience, you'll know which arguments are effective and which are failed experiments. It's reasonable & expected that your oral illusions will become more-and-more persuasive as they refine over innumerable debate encounters. No one will be convinced but there may be lurkers who will think differently because of something you said. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-09_940_debating.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-09_940_debating.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, debate, rhetoric no Tue, 06 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Free Speech is under attack like it has never been before; lets review why and by who: Without Free Speech Warriors, there will be no free speech. There is no such thing as Free Speech on the Internet. Egalitarians get to define who The Freedom Champions are, and it ain't us. Disrupting Free Speech isn't Free Speech. Free Speech Zones are the opposite of Free Speech. The Proud Boys learned they can't fight the anti-Free Speechers on their home turf. Yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theater is perfectly legal; everybody should try it. Blocking is an important ingredient of online Freedom of Association. Banning is the primary weapon of the anti-Free Speechers. Whistle-Blowers don't have any Free Speech but political lackeys do. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-08_939_free_speech_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-08_939_free_speech_concepts.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, free speech no Sun, 04 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Free Speech includes the concept of a whistle-blower, someone who risks their job & reputation to report a government misdeed they have knowledge of. There’s actually a law that protects whistle-blowers but it’s seemingly ineffective except when abused as a political weapon. In fact, phony, partisan whistle-blowers get all the protections while the people the law was actually intended for suffer just as much or more punishment & censor as ever: Julian Assange & Edward Snowden come to mind. WikiLeaks founder, Assange, an Australian, published a series of leaks provided by U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. These leaks included the Baghdad airstrike Collateral Murder video, the Afghanistan war logs, the Iraq war logs, and Cablegate. Phony sex charges were brought against Assange who escaped to the Ecuadorian embassy in London. At one point, the U.S. tried to abduct Assange from there with the embassy’s help; eventually the Ecuadorians handed him over to be jailed.   American Edward Snowden’s disclosures revealed numerous global surveillance programs, many run by the NSA and the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance with the cooperation of telecommunication companies and European governments. There were literally millions of documents but Snowden only turned over ones he deemed violated people’s rights. Like Assange, Snowden was a true hero who gave up the good life. his career, his fiance, his homeland, and his own freedom. He's a very brave person willing to sacrifice everything for liberty and the truth. I'd like to think that a lot of people would be whistle-blowers if they had to, no matter the cost, specifically me. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-08_938_whistle-blowers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-08_938_whistle-blowers.mp3 2:47 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, whistle-blower, Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden no Fri, 02 Apr 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Banning has always been a favorite of the sanctimonious, and always filled with hypocrisy: the Confederate flag is banned but not the ISIS flag; common gestures like an okay sign are now banned as symbols of hate, but not a clinched Communist fist; and classic songs, like “Baby, it’s cold outside,” are banned as encouraging rape, but hip-hop songs that actually include rape are hits. There's a list of 73 books now banned on Amazon, many of which had been on sale for years, because modern readers can no longer be trusted to read them, or their authors to profit by them, except, apparently, “Mein Kampf;” it’s still for sale. Perhaps the money goes to a trendy diversity organization? However, banning of Speech used to be anathema, considered a pillar of American democracy, seemingly protected in The Constitution. Not anymore; when provocative voices were being banned from powerful, monopolistic Social Media platforms, The Left vigorously defended allowing private companies to do anything they want, even though those same people have a list of things they would like to ban private companies from doing; hypocrisy is obviously immune to cynicism. Often the reason given for the banning is to reduce hateful rhetoric. Ironically, TikTok, the popular Chinese Social Media app for kids, bans “fat, ugly, weirdos” as a means of decreasing hate speech. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-08_937_banning.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-08_937_banning.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, free speech, social media, banning no Wed, 31 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The concept of Blocking, where a person can deny another person from following them on social media, is a new one. In the past, we had private clubs where groups of people could be selective, but never before have we had such exclusivity at a personal level. The primary advantage of Blocking is that it facilitates your Freedom of Association, ridding yourself of odious personalities who make your life worse. The danger of Blocking is that it hardens the walls of the silos we keep ourselves in. However, Blocking can also facilitate online discussion. In Real Life, IRL, when someone of diminished mental or psychological capacity joins your conversation, it only takes a minute or two to mute them: some subtle physical indications; a slight turning of the body, ignoring, a condescending attitude, and other clues the invader usually perceives, and so shuts up; but social media is rife with mental illness & abhorrent behavior precisely because it can’t be adequately moderated. The solution is Blocking. Other solutions, like Ignoring & Up-ranking, can easily be exploited & abused; if you want to have a nuanced discussion without being interrupted by the idiots, Blocking is really the only option. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-07_936_blocked.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-07_936_blocked.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, block, online no Mon, 29 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor One of the common tropes used by the people who want to restrict speech is to give an example of restricted speech: “you can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater,” they smugly claim. This piece of folk legalese permeates popular culture but the simply fact is, you can yell “fire” in a crowded theater; there’s no law against it, knock yourself out. The old 1919 case that inspired that canard is often posited in Year One Law School discussions to take all the cocky newbies down a peg. The law that actually sets the limits on free speech is 1969's Brandenburg case, which says someone cannot incite a riot or credibly threaten imminent harm on another person, particularly the president of the United States; however, even that is obviously a debatable prohibition since so many people do it. So a fire-yeller could be charged both civilly and criminally if they intentionally try to cause havoc & chaos, and someone gets hurt. That's key, their actions must have caused some kind of provable damage; simply saying they caused a little panic, fright or offense is not enough, though the anti-free speechers want it to be. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-07_935_yelling_fire_in_a_crowded_theater.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-07_935_yelling_fire_in_a_crowded_theater.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, yelling fire in a crowded theater, free speech no Sat, 27 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The Proud Boys were created to counteract the anti-Free Speech movement, and they were successful for a short while by basing their credibility of their leader, Gavin McInnes, co-founder of influential Vice magazine. However, Proud Boys made the fatal mistake of thinking they could respond to the anti-Free Speech organization, Antifa, in Democrat-controlled cities, and having identifiable leadership; it didn't take long for them to be vilified by the MSM. The Proud Boys Wiki page is obviously written to misrepresent & defame them. Leftist Tech monopoly-controlled Social Media labeled them an extremist group, and Cancelled McInnes. I looked into Proud Boys because of their exploits in Portland, Oregon, where I live; an anti-Free Speech stronghold promoting itself as a “No Go” zone. The Proud Boys were formed to ensure there were no Free Speech No Go zones and so they went there to protest, but what happened is not what was reported in the media. In the morning, the Proud Boys drove into Portland, got out of their bus, walked around in a circle, got back on their bus, which by then was being attacked by Antifa, and drove away; half-hour tops. All the reporting of violence, mugging, assaults, etc. attributed to them was actually committed by Antifa on innocent passerbys, not even close to the short march area. All 13 arrested after The Proud Boys left were Antifa, but it doesn’t say that in the news articles. With no way to defend themselves, The Proud Boys no longer have the capacity to defend Free Speech; the opposite in fact, they’re an example of what happens to anyone who tries. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-07_934_proud_boys.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-07_934_proud_boys.mp3 2:53 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Proud Boys, Antifa no Thu, 25 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Under the guise of Safe Spaces, the campuses of liberal arts colleges are no Free Speech zones; which is the source of the contagion against Free Speech that has now permeated into Democrat-controlled cities, and enforced on the streets by Antifa. The origins of Antifa go back to the 1930s as Communists in Italy & Germany fought back against the Fascists, then defined by the National Socialists, the Nazis, where they engaged in the same kind of intimidation & violence they use today, though now their enemy is The Patriarchy in general, and Free Speech in particular. Because of that, Antifa has been declared a terrorist organization, but they simply morphed into BLM, which has the same goals, though couched in politically untouchable language and skin-coloring. I have some personal knowledge of Antifa because one of their bogeymen, mixed-race Joey Gibson, is local, and I attended court while he defended his right to assemble and speak freely in a public park. When he obtained an information booth for his organization, Patriot Prayer, at the local community college, Antifa threatened to show up and protest, so the school decided to cancel classes entirely and send staff home rather than support & accept the consequence of free speech. The institution literally enabled a no Free Speech zone; what a pitiful indicator of the state of Free Speech in our educational system, to immediately capitulate to Antifa’s aims. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-06_933_no_free_speech_zones.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-06_933_no_free_speech_zones.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Free Speech, BLM, Antifa no Tue, 23 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor As bizarre as it seems to older people, there are organized efforts to disrupt Free Speech in America, primarily discriminating against Conservatives, and it's gaining steam. It’s rooted in ideology, one intent on overturning the status quo, and Free Speech counter to their narrative of Social Justice makes that difficult. Their argument is the distorted, egalitarian view of liberty, with all the selfishness and none of the responsibility or introspection; the idea that if someone says something that offends you, you can prevent that person from speaking, especially if their message lies outside of acceptable thought. Examples of disrupting Free Speech aren’t hard to find: Conservative speakers barred from college campuses include Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin, Kathleen Parker, Charles Murray, Ben Shapiro, Christina Hoff, and many more. And if they do get a venue, they're censored with a Heckler’s Veto, noise-making & interruptions. The hypocrisy of obstructing someone else from speaking by claiming Free Speech has already been determined unlawful, but it’s none-the-less effective unless there is a willingness to enforce the law. Another way to suppress Free Speech are the specious claims about safety to justify denying access, or trying to make the speaker financially responsible for additional security. Disrupting Free Speech is tragic but it’s to be expected in a Communist revolution. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-06_932_disrupting_free_speech.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-06_932_disrupting_free_speech.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, free speech, Heckler's Veto no Sun, 21 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The world strives to be egalitarian; only the U.S. is a bastion of liberty, which promotes meritocracy, creating inequality, the opposite of egalitarian. Therefore, whenever some world ranking emerges that purports to measure something with an egalitarian bent, the U.S. tends to do poorly; even something as fundamental to America as freedom. In the eyes of the German think tanks that prepare the World Freedom Index, freedom is measured by how much you can bully other people’s liberty; for example, if you’re offended by what another person is doing, can you force them to stop? And if another person has been more success than you, can you force them to share? Because in the eyes of the oral illusionists who measure “freedom,” equality makes you free. Their components of freedom are: economic, political and press, as measured on an egalitarian scale, which add together for a Total Freedom Score. In that light, it’s not difficult to guess which nations are the freedom champions: There’s Sweden, followed by Norway, Finland, Denmark and The Netherlands. Canada, where you could go to jail for misgendering someone, is in the top 10. Apparently, egalitarian freedom includes ineffectual depression and long summer vacations, because all of those nations specialize in that too. These are nations that would be expected to insure freedom around the world with their militaries, economies & global diplomacy… Or not. Where is the U.S. on the World Freedom Index you might wonder? #27, just below Cyprus but above Slovakia. Perhaps America's Freedom ranking is pulled down because we have to register for the draft; but if we had a Universal Basic Income, we could probably break into the top 20. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-06_931_the_freedom_ch_ions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-06_931_the_freedom_ch_ions.mp3 3:04 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, egalitarian, equality, World Freedom Index, freedom, liberty no Fri, 19 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor When people think of Free Speech, they don’t consider the nuance that the guarantee only keeps the government from restricting speech. In everyday life, your employer, the businesses you patronize, even your church can restrict what you say. With the rise of Tech giants that control Social Media where most speech occurs nowadays, restricting speech seems to be the norm rather than the exception, and has become especially egregious. The examples of bias against conservatives is well-documented, and is encouraged by illiberals who applaud & defend the practice. The specious argument that if you can’t post to Facebook, Twitter or Google, go somewhere else, only requires a few minutes of investigation to perceive that futility. If the monopolies were not biased, perhaps they could be ignored but the danger would always exist to exploit their censorship power at strategic times, for example, just before an election, like they’ve been doing. Even if those companies claim their policy is to be unbiased, they give a wink & nod to employees who abuse their privilege to engage in it. Propaganda works, and the government is the only one we allow to use it because they are supposed to be accountable, but our society is being inundated by totally unaccountable sources; in fact, there are probably foreign actors determining what Americans are seeing & hearing. If ever that was a time for government to intervene to guarantee free exchange of ideas, the time is now. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-05_930_free_internet_speech.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-05_930_free_internet_speech.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, internet, tech monopoly, free speech no Wed, 17 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Social Justice Warriors unironically named themselves that, and maintain their self-proclaimed title proudly even though it’s ridiculed by The Right, actually reaching the status of a slur. Similarly, the term “Free Speech Warrior” is denigrated by The Left, even though Free Speechers don't get offended by the title. Unfortunately, SJWs seem to far outnumber their Free Speech counterparts, and the small number of vocal advocates for free speech are continually besmirched by the media as “Right-Wing,” which they equate with Nazis. The arguments against Free Speech sound bizarre to someone raised to believe it's one of the most basic Rights; SJWs claim your speech is constrained by them being offended; but isn't that exactly the point? This complete misunderstanding about Free Speech is only possible by not teaching students in public schools what it is, how precious it is, and how important it is to protect. A Leftist arguing against Free Speech by burning a U.S. flag at a protest is beyond hypocrisy; especially when at the same time they use Free Speech to smear their rivals. I, for one, would be proud to be called a Free Speech Warrior, but without Free Speech, I guess that won't be possible much longer. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-05_929_free_speech_warrior.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-05_929_free_speech_warrior.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, free speech no Mon, 15 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Liberty has value, more than most people even consider; let's review: Conservatives, Liberals & Collectivists are separated from each other by their treatment of liberty. Americans didn't used to be afraid to proclaim their liberty; in fact, they were proud of it. You can identify your allies by how they treat your liberty. The Constitution's guarantee of life, liberty & property means more than the 3 simple words. Libertyists are the natural opposites of Equalists. Both the Left-wing and the Right-wing claim they have liberty, but their definitions are different. Liberty for all is only possible if it's individually constrained. It's frighting & concerning how easily people will surrender liberty. Protecting liberty is as easy and as difficult as learning from the past. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-05_928_value_of_liberty_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-05_928_value_of_liberty_concepts.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Sat, 13 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Liberty is under the greatest threat in our lifetime from people making equality, rather than liberty, the goal. This isn't the first time egalitarianism has had a substantial foothold in America; it was stronger than it is now in the late 19th century, and almost lost during The Depression, but WW2 caused the goal of liberty to come rushing back. After that liberty was protected by Cold War indoctrination for several decades. Unfortunately, after the fall of the Soviet Union, we assumed liberty was safe and nobody was left guarding it. In the meantime, egalitarianism didn't go anyway; it festered unnoticed for three decades until now it has reemerged with a vengeance. The fault doesn’t lay with the egalitarians, no, the fault is in all of us who ignored the “long march through the institutions” by The Left. The first step in protecting liberty is to recognize that it's being assaulted; for the majority of the population, that may never happen, but for those of us who’ve been awakened, we have to do something about it. It’s going to be difficult because most of mechanisms: media, entertainment & the workplace; have been compromised through feminism, environmentalism, wokeness & Affirmative Action. White males, especially older ones, have been boxed in, and younger white males have been left to languish while other identity groups were being promoted. We know how to get liberty back, simply return to Cold War methods of indoctrination throughout society; the hard part is regaining the levers of power to do it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-04_927_protecting_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-04_927_protecting_liberty.mp3 2:47 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, protecting no Thu, 11 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Before the lockdowns, I used to think the most dangerous threat to liberty was democracy, that people would eventually vote away their liberty a piece at a time, but to my utter surprise, people surrendered their liberty, virtually all of it, to the pandemic without so much as a whimper; and were seemingly resigned to continue like that indefinitely. It's especially worrisome how few people were willing to speak against the tyranny: apparently, surrendering liberty is easy but defying authoritarianism is difficult; that sanctimonious mocking, scorn & ridicule from the neighbors is an effective deterrent against standing up for your rights. But perhaps the true cause of our capitulation is indeed democracy because of the nature of the leaders that emerge? A large faction of the political candidates who get elected have authoritarian impulses, needing only the opportunity to unleash them. It's unclear what these demagogues want: is it power? Defeat a president they don’t like? Destroy Capitalism? An entire political party surrendered their liberty without hesitation, doesn't seem to want it back; and wants everybody else to surrender their liberty too, which in fact, we did, almost instantaneously. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-04_926_surrendering_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-04_926_surrendering_liberty.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, surrender no Tue, 09 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor On the extreme Far Right, where Libertarians dwell, is the idea that liberty should be unconstrained, but only kings have unconstrained liberty, so that's the end result if everybody doesn't voluntarily constrain their liberty so as not to infringe on the liberty of others. As important as liberty is, it's not sacrosanct; in fact, it's already limited; people curtail their liberty everyday as it bumps against the liberty of other people, and it' definitely the case that the closer people are packed together, the more they must adjust their liberty; examples are paying taxes, obeying laws & regulations, and common courtesy. You can know your allies by their constraint of their own liberty in the face of yours. Unfortunately, some people are not your allies: there are a lot of snowflakes who contend that their liberty supersedes your liberty; that anything they find offensive must be changed, regardless what other people think. They do not understand that courtesy is not mandatory; and that other people voluntarily choose to limit their liberty. In response, if someone takes your courtesy, restraint & forbearance for granted, you should reassert your liberty so as not to allow their lack of constraint to become habitual. By not doing so, your own liberty erodes while theirs grows, until you do indeed find yourself with a king. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-04_925_constrained_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-04_925_constrained_liberty.mp3 2:30 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, constraint no Sun, 07 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor It's difficult to discuss liberty because so many people outside, and even inside, America have a different definition. For example, both the newly emerging nation of America and revolutionary France were based on liberty, but the definition was not the same. This was against a backdrop of kings & priests whose rule was divine. At the time of The Enlightenment, liberty wasn't personal autonomy as much as breaking away from authoritarian rule using democracy. In fact, the French kept that definition and have State-sponsored liberty, where the group determines how everyone must live, while the Americans imagined liberty at an individual level; the person is paramount. Any past or modern reference to "liberty" outside America is a conflation with freedom, not the personal liberty Americans enjoy, which is making decisions for yourself and reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of your own actions. The Right in America are the noted champions of this kind of liberty, while The Left espouses the State-sponsored version. Right-wing liberty overlaps Left-wing liberty concerning freedom, and both are bounded by law, but they differ in that Left-wing liberty does not include the concepts of consequences or personal responsibility, nor is it limited by the liberty of other individuals. The goal of The Right is to increase personal liberty with fewer laws, while the goal of The Left is to expand State-based liberty with more laws. Both sides can argue they support liberty but like all Left vs. Right ideology, the differences makes the two liberties completely incompatible. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-03_924_left-wing_vs_right-wing_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-03_924_left-wing_vs_right-wing_liberty.mp3 2:50 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, definition no Fri, 05 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The two basic ideologies, liberty vs. equality, are in constant conflict. Liberty is making decisions for yourself and reaping the benefits or suffering the consequences of your actions; which requires conscientious behavior because you are the one ultimately responsible for you. Equalists dramatically differ because they don't include responsibility in their calculations; they believe that people should share to the point where no one has anything more than someone else, regardless of effort. There is no meritocracy; you do not benefit from your own hard work & luck, nor are you responsible for your actions that may have beggared you. The number of people who adopt either ideology are evenly split because it's based on self-interest combined with math. The median wealth is the point where half the people have more wealth than the other half. Libertyists want to retain the rewards of their own work, while Equalists want everyone to benefit from everyone's work, or lack thereof. The defining aspect of Equalists is redistribution of everything that is unequal until it's equal. Since Libertyists are inclined to keep what they've earned, the redistribution normally must be through force, which is why Equalists are necessarily authoritarian. This also explains the divide on guns because authoritarianism requires disarming those who would resist them. Equalists require the presence and capitulation of Libertyists, but the reverse is not true: Libertyists don't need any Equalists to live their lives. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-03_923_libertyists_vs_equalists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-03_923_libertyists_vs_equalists.mp3 2:42 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, equalist, libertyist, egalitarian no Wed, 03 Mar 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor America is as divergent a nation as there ever was, built entirely of immigrants. With all the different cultures, customs & traditions, the one thing that held all these people together was a desire for liberty. Liberty is autonomous decision-making and is best for you given the knowledge you possess that no one else does; while other people are presumably doing the same. In the end, the best possible situation emerges because it was managed at every turn by every individual person for their own benefit. Though the implementation isn't perfect, it's as close as any society can get. As long as we shared the ideology of liberty, we were allies with one another. No one owes their allies anything more because fulfilling a contract obligation requires no thanks. We were taught to respect one another, not be offended by them. We certainly didn't impose on their liberty, and we expected them not to impose on ours; and we expect our allies to fulfill their obligations as we fulfill ours. There are no enforced morals, values or ethics, and no foreign interests. Other people are not our unasked for partners, and there is no higher order. Up until now, the alliance was working; however, ask yourself if you feel that most people in America are still allies; and if not, why not? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-02_921_allies_in_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-02_921_allies_in_liberty.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, allies no Sat, 27 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Before The Enlightenment, people just took for granted that they would be controlled by kings & priests, with all decision-making power vested in them, and belief in fate reigned. When the idea of liberty first materialized in the minds of philosophers, it took a while for people to adopt, but its acceptance grew until it consumed nations. For example, “Proclaim liberty throughout all the Land unto all the Inhabitants thereof” is inscribed in bronze on the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia; “secure the Blessings of Liberty” is the main tenet of the Preamble of The Constitution; “with liberty for all” is in the Pledge of Allegiance; and the word “liberty” is even inscribed on our coinage and was thoroughly embedded in all public institutions. Because liberty requires critical thinking, America trained its people in liberty through educational indoctrination: reciting a pledge every morning in school, prayers, mottoes, television programming, special service announcements, parades, fraternal events; and it was certainly the central component of military training. Unfortunately, the traditional liberty narratives have been discontinued, banned or replaced by the enemies of liberty: the feminists, the environmentalists, and even foreign interests who control media & entertainment. The bitter truth is that proclaiming liberty has been canceled. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-02_920_proclaim_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-02_920_proclaim_liberty.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty no Thu, 25 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor In America, the differing ideologies are primarily measures of liberty; but some words are used so haphazardly that their definitions are not clear, especially in politics, so people generally try and fit them on the ubiquitous Left-Right scale; in the case of liberty, Collectivists would be on the left, Liberals in the middle, and Conservatives of the right. Conservatives want a society based on strength, which provides stability, as proven by the many civilizations in the past that rose on strength and fell when they became weak. Unfortunately, concentrated strength results in an aristocracy where an upper class of people have maximum liberty, while lower class members of the society have less, or even none. Several hundred years ago, during The Enlightenment, Liberalism emerged, with the idea of redistributing liberty among all the members of society. America was founded on that principle, and has been mostly successful in getting the most liberty to the most people. Liberalism, as maligned as the word has become, created the most advanced civilization in history by providing freedom to create wealth & opportunity, the ingredients of liberty. However, liberty favors the competent, capable & prepared, which creates a pyramid of success. Relatively speaking, half the population is on the top of the pyramid with the rest holding them up. A side effect of liberalism is that it also redistributes strength, and the bottom half of the pyramid uses their strength to push for what would be better for them, which is Collectivism, forced sharing, where individual liberty is reduced in favor of what is supposedly best for everyone. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-02_919_conservatives__liberals__collectivists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-02_919_conservatives__liberals__collectivists.mp3 2:56 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, liberty, conservatives, liberals, liberalism, collectivism no Tue, 23 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor We've got to review the highly confused concept of equality: Biology makes women egalitarian. The Constitution is based on liberty, the opposite of equality. Equality under the law is the only equality America guarantees. Masculine superiority resulting from testosterone will have to be nullified to satisfy egalitarian sensibilities. From an egalitarian pov, the Gender Pay Gap is real, though not from a liberty perspective. Feminists, minorities, weirdos & their sympathizers are now the voting majority. The inevitable direction of democracy feminizes society. Feminists advance their cause by ignoring boys. Men are accustomed to quiet desperation because they learn it young. Male suicide is self-genocide. Jordan Peterson is vilified because he encourages men to act like men, not women. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-01_918_equality_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-01_918_equality_concepts.mp3 2:48 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, equality, egalitarian, liberty no Sun, 21 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor There are wise, insightful people who recognize that the shifting societal values are destroying men & boys; the most famous being Jordan Peterson, a clinical psychologist who tries to reassure young men that the desperation they're feeling is natural, that they're not alone, and that others care and want to help. Peterson came out of nowhere with videos of his lectures on YouTube getting millions of views, presumably by young men desperately grasping for purpose. He explains the situation perfectly, and gives sound, easy to follow advice. To many young men, he is the mentoring father-they never had. The reason Peterson is a hero is that he is engaging the feminists, minorities & weirdos who are causing all of this angst while no one else seems to be fighting back. He's controversial because he advocates that people be responsible for themselves, which sounds obvious to liberty-minded Americans, but is counter to the egalitarian idea that other people are responsible for you. Peterson tirelessly frequents talk shows, and does book tours all around the world, all-the-while under intense scrutiny by the Leftist media, who are soundly defeated by his calm demeanor & flawless logic. Unfortunately, the stress was enough to crush any man, and Jordan Peterson was too sensitive to endure it forever, and since virtually everyone is a coward or incompetent, there may never again be someone else to take Jordan Peterson's place mentoring men. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-01_917_mentoring_men.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-01_917_mentoring_men.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Jordan Peterson, mentor no Fri, 19 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Many diseases overwhelmingly affect men; for example, three-quarters of the COVID19 deaths were men but it was hardly mentioned. Imagine if a protected class: women, minorities, or the disabled, were the ones affected? It would be hyped as genocide. But the most egregious statistic is that in the West, four times as many men commit suicide as women, and it's increasing, yet no one says anything about the reasons for it; specifically the feminization of society. If people doubt there is a war between the sexes, male suicide casualties should be proof enough, over 30,000 men a year. But it's worse than that: The Left seems to take great glee in the failure of young white men in society; every Fentanyl death appears to be a win to them. In fact, since men overwhelmingly use guns to commit suicide, The Left uses that as a reason to justify gun prohibition: men kill themselves with guns so take away their guns, as if that's the problem. The accepted theory of why the suicide rates of men has dramatically increased is that male gender roles are under attack since they emphasize strength, independence, risk-taking, economic status, and individualism; so, in short: it's actually the increase of egalitarianism that drives men to suicide. The solution is obvious, men need a return to liberty. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-01_916_genocide_by_suicide.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-09-01_916_genocide_by_suicide.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, male, suicide no Wed, 17 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Nineteenth Century Poet Henry David Thoreau's famous quote, “most men lead lives of quiet desperation and go to their graves with the songs still in them,” is less well known today even though it is more applicable than ever. Boys learn to suppress their ambitions when they are traversing puberty; during the failures, during the bullying, during the defeats, during the rejection by women. Their careers are always a fight for second or third place. By the time they are men, they have learned to submit, accept their lot in life, and must not complain because the penalties against violating the unspoken code are severe. As they get older, they become more and more invisible, to society and themselves. They use drugs & alcohol to deaden the disappointment of a life that started with optimism but ending in silence. Girls, though they have their own rights of passage, don’t compete in the male dominance hierarchy, so are not taught to despair until well into adulthood. When they are ultimately made aware that they are not Disney princesses, they have not built up an emotional callus like men have, resulting in regret, anxiety & depression. In frustration, they lash out at society, particularly scapegoating men who seem aloof & sanguine, not understanding that men are quietly subdued because they are already intimately acquainted with desperation. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-31_915_quiet_desperation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-31_915_quiet_desperation.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, men, desperation no Mon, 15 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Society is rapidly changing; it’s becoming ever-more centered around the needs of girls. Boys are most affected since now they’re raised like girls, and their testosterone has no place to go. Like all intractable problems, rather than do something about it, it's simply easier to ignore boys, especially considering the cognitive dissonance that comes from women’s subconscious disdain for men. In a society that is at war with itself, split along gender lines, boys are sacrificed. One of the arguments for more immigration, legal or not, is that America needs the manpower, literally, because American boys are a lost cause. The institutions dominated by women have decided to abandon even the pretense of caring what happens to boys. In fact, they revel in boy’s downfall because it signals their own rise. For example, a common complaint of female schoolteachers is that boys won't do as they're told; they won’t sit still; they’re aggressive & competitive; and their antics negatively impact the education of girls. This is all true and will remain so as long as there's a difference in testosterone between the sexes. Wingnut Feminists already recognize this male superpower and demonize testosterone, or its attributes, at every opportunity, with terms like “toxic masculinity.” Women now control the levers of power, so the ultimate result is rather predictable; a call for the literally feminizing boys with anti-testosterone drugs. The Left is ready, just look how accepting they are of transgendering boys to girls. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-31_914_ignore_boys.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-31_914_ignore_boys.mp3 2:55 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, education, ignore, boys, girls, testosterone no Sat, 13 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The claim has always been that underrepresented groups, women being the most visible, had no power and so were exploited by society. This complaint seemed valid and men adjusted to accommodate the demands of women. Of course things changed but the consequence has been that society is now more a reflection of the needs of women than men, to the point that America's entire liberty underpinnings are threatened. A significant proportion of women vote only for women, regardless of political party, so given time & organization, women will occupy the majority of elected positions. All changes are in the direction that benefits females: egalitarianism in school, workplace, even the home. Motherhood had always been treated specially, and it made sense since the primary priority of society is to perpetuate itself. Traditionally, it was women & children first when sacrifices had to be made, and men have been willing to take a subservient role. Liberty was also partly responsible because of its live-and-let-live attitude. Women have used this ingrained response of men to actually push them out of their accustomed, and frankly, genetic, role. Men have also been barred their familiar methods of fighting back: no anger, no violence, no aggression; what used to be considered strengths and admired are now derided and discouraged. Instead men are subject to the penalties exacted by women: shunning, shaming, ostracization, cancelling, harping, nagging. Men simply don't know how to respond, except to capitulate, which is what they would do with a stronger male; or ignore; both strategies which eventually end in a feminized society. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-31_913_feminizing_society.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-31_913_feminizing_society.mp3 2:58 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, women, voting, feminization, society, no Thu, 11 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Society is going through a major metamorphosis because there's a new power-base; one that's been operating behind-the-scenes for decades but now has so completely infiltrated all aspects of opinion-making, media, entertainment, higher education, & tech; that they have virtual control, and possibly even majority control since it has become fashionable among the youth to support them. They are promulgating new ideas like cosmopolitanism, intersectionality & egalitarianism. This not-so-mysterious group is composed of feminists, minorities & weirdos. Who are these groups? Feminists need no explanation except to observe that not all woman are feminists. Likewise, a difference in skin color does not determine a minority; they are instead people who have a minority mindset, a determination to exploit skin color for advantage. Weirdos are people who have been left out because they don't fit into the norm; they dress oddly, speak oddly, like odd things or have odd beliefs, and take pride in their weirdness. Organization, browbeating, bullying & Affirmative Action are the way feminists, minorities & weirdos got the extraordinary power they have today, and there doesn't seem to be any way for white males to retake that ground; the law and public opinion is against them, the Democrat party is dominated by them, and even once dependably loyal institutions like the military & judiciary are compromised. Feminists, minorities & weirdos are the new team to beat. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-30_912_feminists__minorities__weirdos.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-30_912_feminists__minorities__weirdos.mp3 3:01 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, feminists, minorities, weirdos no Tue, 09 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor One of the most common unfounded complaints about gender equality is the so-called, gender pay gap. Uber, the personal taxi company, did a study with well over a million participants, under the best of conditions without possibility of subconscious discrimination. Like the national average, there was a 7% pay gap between men and women drivers, yet they had absolutely equal opportunity, but men drove faster, they would drive at night in bad neighborhoods, and work longer hours. Accounting for such performance there is no gender pay gap, and this isn't the only study that concludes that. But even though the gender pay gap claim has been thoroughly debunked, it won't go away because it's both effective politically, and true if the premise is changed to a from each according to their ability, to each according to their need attitude. Under that assumption, if men are getting paid more than women, for whatever reason, they should give the difference to women until equal. To a person raised on liberty & meritocracy, where a person makes decisions for themselves and reaps the rewards or suffers the consequences of their own actions, this seems totally counter to everything they believe, but to an egalitarian it makes perfect sense. There isn't really a gender pay gap so much as a gender ideology gap. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-30_911_gender_pay_gap.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-30_911_gender_pay_gap.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, gender pay gap, egalitarian, liberty no Sun, 07 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Men have had testosterone dumped into their bloodstream every day since puberty, and the machinery that makes up their bodies was defined by it at birth. It's simply a biological fact that, on average, women can’t compete with men because they simply aren't equal to men, physically or motivationally. Because of testosterone, men are stronger, more competitive, more ambitious, more aggressive, more violent, and a host of other important unequal-making differences. There's usually one woman who can beat a man at something traditionally thought of as masculine but the way Bell Curves work, in the end, a general man is measurably superior to a general woman. Feminists denigrate these superior features as “toxic,” but transwoman actually take advantage of them to dominate in female sports. The cost of the testosterone advantage is that for all those men who excel, just as many end up with mental illness, suicide & alcoholism. That is not a trade-off most women want to make so they try and deny men their advantage under the guise of equality. Males are going to do what they’re programmed to do; they don’t have much choice in the matter, whereas females have a choice; they can understand the situation and use it, or pretend outrage and keep up a constant drumbeat for equality which leads nowhere productive, and is actually perverse. Let males do masculine things, which are required to make society function efficiently and propel it forward, and let females accept men as are they. Women shouldn't try to compete directly with masculine superiority because testosterone always wins in the end, and always has. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-30_910_masculine_superiority.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-30_910_masculine_superiority.mp3 2:58 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, testosterone, inequality, masculine, superiority no Fri, 05 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The Declaration of Indepences says that all men are created equal, but not that they have to stay that way, and we can't even be sure the “men” part of that statement included women? Equality is certainly not part of American jurisprudence except as equality under the law as mentioned in the 14th amendment, which means everyone has the same protections and court system as the elites; so if people are looking to find equality, there is none; no one is equal; there is not a person on this earth equal to another person, we all have our own luck. On the other hand, liberty is ingrained in The Constitution's Preamble: “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, ”along with a list of methods to make that happen: “form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, and promote the general Welfare.” Liberty is the opposite of equality; in fact, it actually excaserbates inequality because people making decisions for themselves and reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of their own actions tends to do that. Though people, out of egalitarianism or envy, may wish for equality, America is not the place to find it; it's Marxism that promises equality. However, America's equality under the law is the model for the world. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-29_909_equality_under_the_law.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-29_909_equality_under_the_law.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, equality, equality under the law, inequality, liberty no Wed, 03 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Equality isn't part of the American guarantee; we only guarantee "equality under the law," and no prohibition of opportunity based on a recognized class system, commonly called "equal opportunity," though it's far from being the same for everyone. The only place where equality is mentioned in the founding documents of the United States is in the Declaration of Independence, in the famous phrase “all men are created equal,” but the Declaration isn't part of legal canon, and created equal is obviously denouncing castes, where people used to have to be what their lineage forced them to be. Anti-discrimination laws are intended to alleviated some of the artificial inequalities, but equality of outcome was never intended, and is nowhere supported in America's ideological foundation, though it did show up in France's revolution so people often confuse the two: equality of opportunity vs. equality of outcome. The innate inequality of women in general is excused because any individual woman can make a place in the Male Dominance Hierarchy if she wants, though she must be ready & prepared for the competition against men, rather than complain about misogyny, discrimination, sexual harassment, or any of the other excuses used if they rank lowly. Those are the tactics employed by women who are no match against high-ranking males, but since there’s a lot of women, and all our votes actually are equal, it’s an effective strategy. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-29_908_equality.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-29_908_equality.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, equality, inequality, caste, equality of opportunity, equality of outcome no Mon, 01 Feb 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor If women had been fully integrated into government, and enfranchised at the time, The Constitution probably wouldn't be liberty-based: no making decisions for yourself, and reaping the benefits or suffering the consequences of your actions. Instead it would have been more egalitarian: from each according to their ability, to each according to their need. The competing ideologies makes a big difference in society because egalitarianism tries to make people equal, while liberty tends to make them unequal. Not only does liberty benefit men due to the fact that both ambition & competitiveness are boosted by testosterone, but woman also shoulder the bulk of the responsibility in childbearing & rearing, which affects their priorities such that, given the same opportunities, on average, men will excel over them. This has nothing to do with capability or work ethic; it's simply different situations. The result is that, in the aggregate, women would benefit in a sharing society, specifically an egalitarian society where the motivational and situational advantages of men are muted. Combine that with the current aggrandizement of past grievances, and it's easy to understand why women congregate on one political team, and men on the other. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-29_907_women_are_egalitarian.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-29_907_women_are_egalitarian.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, women, egalitarian no Sat, 30 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let's review the many ways we are indoctrinated in society: “The greater good” is always what the person saying it thinks is good. “To each according to their need” puts the needy in charge. The Bible was the source material for Marxism. Americans are raised Marxist; it's a wonder personal autonomy has any foothold at all. Math is what happens if ideologues are not also practical. “The long march through the institutions” has been even more successful than the Marxists imagined. The Left got control of corporate boards while The Right was raiding pension funds. The next civil war is going to be fought by men even though the actual war is between the sexes. Fascism is socialist, regardless of the narrative otherwise. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-28_906_indoctrination_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-28_906_indoctrination_concepts.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Marxism, egalitarian no Thu, 28 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The interpretation of fascism older people grew up with was National Socialism, the ideology of the Axis powers in WW2. Giovanni Gentile is the philosopher who imagined Fascism, and was the ghost-writer of Mussolini's speech on the topic. He was an ardent Marxist; a quote from his biography says: "He found vindication for the rejection of individualism, and acceptance of collectivism, with the state as the ultimate location of authority and loyalty outside of which individuality had no meaning." So the original definition of Fascism was Marxism combined with Nationalism. Now, however, the counter-narrative definition of "fascism" has been changed to not include socialism because the egalitarian-Left wants to call the liberty-Right, fascists, so they say Fascism is different from Socialism; but so is Marxism, so is Communism; but they all include collectivism and controlling the means of production. The difference is that Fascists are in bed with private corporations, they don't actually own them. Nazi Germany nationalized many businesses for the collective furtherment of the nation, especially Jewish ones; then those businesses were given to Capitalist cronies of the State. Italy's fascism was also Crony Capitalism; and so was Japan's. The history & facts speak for themselves; fascism is socialist, as is any ideology that subjugates liberty. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-28_905_fascism_is_socialist.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-28_905_fascism_is_socialist.mp3 2:33 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, fascism, socialism, socialist no Tue, 26 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Most people can tell there's a civil war going on but they aren't sure who the sides are? Many think it's racial, but that's only a small, well-publicized component; the real battle is between liberty vs. egalitarianism, which essentially boils down to men vs. women. The ranks of egalitarians has grown dramatically in the past 2 decades; from a small, fringe group during the Cold War to close to half the nation since. Millennial women in particular, are the enemy of older, white men, with old feminists supporting and encouraging the conflict. The sons of single mothers, and low status males with a chip on their shoulder, add to the ranks. Men let this situation develop like boiling a frog because they were reluctant to stop it: fathers didn't want to argue with their daughters, and sons didn't want conflict with their wives, so the cult of egalitarianism got where it is today. The entire Democrat party was captured; as was Education, Entertainment, Tech & the Media; all due to the infiltration by women through browbeating and preferential hiring. No one pushed back because no one could, otherwise they would immediately be labeled a sexist and canceled. It's gotten to the point where violence is the next step: men either have to capitulate or be willing to suffer the consequences of resisting. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-28_904_war_of_the_sexes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-28_904_war_of_the_sexes.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, war of the sexes, egalitarian no Sun, 24 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor How does a company get a President or CEO who's support of Leftist activism that hurts their business keep their position of authority? The fiduciary responsibility of a company's management is to their stockholders, who are ostensibly represented by the company's Board of Directors. That means, somehow these big companies have had their Boards co-opted because their leadership should have been fired as soon as biased ideological antics started to hurt the bottom-line. For example, Jeff Zucker, president of CNN, would be fired if the Board thought news should be unbiased, or he’s losing the company money. Are they so immersed in the Leftism of a big city, and their disdain for the rest of the country so complete, that they become elitist? Is it their wives and daughters at home egging them into egalitarian directions? How are these Boards being manipulated? You either have control of the narrative or it has control of you. The Rothschild’s know this; that’s why they own Reuters and API. The Democratic Party knows this, and the Deep State knows this; that's why almost all Media corps are Leftist. How come there’s no Righties on those boards? A shareholder revolt can be organized: get 10,000 people buying 100 shares of Disney until there's enough shares to get someone on the Board. Even if that 1 vote couldn't swing decisions, at least they could report what's going on. The Righties in Congress could fight back by targeting their IP & liability protections; corporate tax advantages; and block out those organizations’ lobbyists, attendance at Fed functions, access to the White House, etc. As it is now, The Right is being cast in the roll of Nero. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-27_903_does_the_left_controls_corp_boards.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-27_903_does_the_left_controls_corp_boards.mp3 3:06 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, corporate boards, bias no Fri, 22 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor In 1967, German communist student-activist Rudi Dutsche was impressed by the Chinese communist “long march,” referring to Mao's Red army crossing China; and Italian communist organizer, Antonio Gramsci, who described the need for a "war of position" to establish the conditions for an egalitarian revolution. Dutsche combined these two ideas into the slogan, “the long march through the institutions,” which means subverting society by infiltrating its institutions and professions. After the fall of the Soviet Union, when Americans breathed a sigh of relief and let their vigilance against egalitarianism lapse, this unheralded strategy became very effective. There’s an elephant in the room and we’re all conditioned not to see it. Either all Media, Entertainment, Education & Tech are founded and run by Trump-hating Leftists, with absolutely no diversity of thought, or The Long March Through The Institutions has succeeded so well that no one ever mentions conspiracy; not even any public speculation. To any statistician, the situation is problematic, Jeffrey Epstein-level implausible. How much more likely is it that The Left quietly operated under the radar while The Right was absorbed earning money. In the end, The Left will take all the money, so who’s the genius and who's the fool? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-27_902_the_long_march_through_the_institutions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-27_902_the_long_march_through_the_institutions.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, long march through the institutions, conspiracy no Wed, 20 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The egalitarian Left desires to take from one half of the population and give to the other half, which is not the same as the redistributionist Center's strategy of taking from the upper 2% and giving to everyone else, but both ideas inflame The Right. The argument from The Right is that the mega-wealthy earned their money, or presumably their parents did, and no one has a right to take it for any reason, but math is not ideological, so concentration of wealth is not something anyone earned. Some examples are needed to explain this concept: If someone has $50 million, and they know through their elite connections where to get a risk-free 7% return, then their income rises exponentially faster than Joe Middle-Class letting his money manager place $50K for a risky 5% return while skimming 2% off the top. All of this while three-quarters of the population earns nothing on nothing; in fact, they pay 18% on their credit card. To put a final point on it, the folks who earn a decent living, like doctors, pay 35% on their earnings while the ultra-wealthly, who do nothing but gamble, pay only 15% on theirs. It’s an exploitation racket that eventually results in social conflict when enough people understand what's going on and get sick-n-tired of it; it's just a matter of the math. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-27_901_math_is_not_ideological.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-27_901_math_is_not_ideological.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wealth, concentration, redistribution no Mon, 18 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Growing up, we are immersed in egalitarianism & authoritarianism, the basic components of Marxism; Anyone raised in a nuclear family can see the ingredients: parents tell you what to do, and you tie your little sister's shoelaces because you can and she needs it. Plus, all the kids are treated equally, and get an equal vote. At church, a Christian family is steeped in Bible stories, many of which are egalitarian; then the kids go to school where they're taught that if everyone can't have a piece of candy, no one can; environmentalist indoctrination of we must do what's best for everyone; and that the bourgeoisie, the Middle Class, are racists. At after-school sports, everyone gets a trophy. Because of this egalitarian envelopment in home, church & school, America has been periodically flirting with Marxism. The Cold War was used to hold it in abeyance because personal sovereignty was emphasized to children during those years, but after the fall of the Soviet Union, believers in egalitarianism: the feminists, minorities & weirdos; got control of public education. Liberty was no longer the ideology, and for the past decades, the natural course towards Marxism has returned. When students finally do hear about liberty, they are horrified how selfish it seems because they were never taught about personal responsibility either. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-25_900_raised_a_marxist.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-25_900_raised_a_marxist.mp3 2:42 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, marxism, egalitarian no Sat, 16 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The basis of Marxism is egalitarianism. Karl Marx offered some technical ideas on how to achieve that goal, but Marx wasn't a philosopher, he relied on past philosophers, specifically the Bible; for example:   Proverbs 11:24 There is one who withholds what is justly due, and yet it results only in want. Acts 2:44-45 All the believers were together and had everything in common. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. Acts 4:34-35 For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales, and it was distributed to anyone who had need. Exodus 16:16-18 This is what the Lord has commanded: ‘Everyone is to gather as much as they need." The one who gathered much did not have too much, and the one who gathered little did not have too little. Everyone had gathered just as much as they needed. Those scriptures do describe Communist ideology, but Acts 11:29 is the smoking gun: “Every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren,” is close enough for copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is the use of style & substance of a work, and knowledge of it: Marx's obvious contact with the Bible, combined with the way-to-similar translation of "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" is too coincidental not to be intentional. Marx was obviously a plagiarist. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-25_899_the_bible_is_marxist.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-25_899_the_bible_is_marxist.mp3 3:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Marxism, Bible no Thu, 14 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Communism has a bad name, rightfully so, and it's credo, “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need,” elicits an unthinking knee-jerk reaction from liberty-loving Americans, but the sentiment is not really so clear cut. In reality, the first part of the sentence, “from each according to their ability” doesn't actually conflict with liberty. It's simply the Willy Sutton rule: when asked why he robbed banks, Willy said “because that's where the money is,” and you can't fault his logic; resources must come from the resourceful. People choose to exchange their wealth for whatever they want, and the pragmatic approach, the one that will keep society functioning and the wealth-concentrators alive, is to spread some of it around; voluntarily if begrudgingly. It's the second part of the statement, “to each according to their need,” that is anathema to liberty because it gives the right to claim things from others. All a Communist has to say is that “I need it and you have it so give it to me,” then armed men come and ensure the transfer. It's not difficult to see how that could be easily abused, and is, just ask any former Communist. They even go so far as to jail people who accumulate anything, or don't work hard enough, or seem to be taking pride in their accomplishments. There is no ideology more counter to liberty than having the needy be in charge. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-25_898_to_each_according_to_their_need.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-25_898_to_each_according_to_their_need.mp3 2:43 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wealth, communism, credo no Tue, 12 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor No phrase has been uttered more often to excuse the most heinous of crimes than, “for the greater good.” It works as excellent cover because good is subjective, so everyone imagines their own good, and they want more of it. It entered the lexicon from philosopher Jeremy Bentham in the early 19th Century as part of his ideology of Utilitarianism, and has been propagated by other famous philosophers, notably John Stuart Mill. For the greater good is the basis of socialism, but it's not a condemnation of Capitalism because it's demonstrable that Capitalism has been for the greater good, so fits comfortably into the Utilitarian ideology; whereas Marxism, which is based on egalitarianism, puts equality over good: it is better for all people to be equally barefoot than only some to wear shoes. Corollary sentiments are “for the common good,” and “the most good to the most people;” which have repeatedly been used to justify Elites making decisions contrary to the liberty of others. Unfortunately, all of these concepts require perfect knowledge and the ability to predict the future; as well as the hubris to claim to know what's best for everyone. But even with these obvious deficits, “the greater good” remains an alluring prospect to many people, especially to the youth with little life experience to recognize that they have no idea what's good. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-24_897_the_greater_good.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-24_897_the_greater_good.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, socialism, greater good no Sun, 10 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let's review the concepts that keep a society running: Political aptitude tests are fun to take but are little more than entertainment. Politics was the intention to rise above tribal values, but it has failed. People know their place and are satisfied with it. There used to be American ideals, but there aren't any longer. How could morals ever be universal if there are so many gods who say otherwise? Compromises erode away the ideology until they become the ideology. The enemy within is a cancer eating away at the body of America. Who needs 3 branches of government when the president has Executive Orders & National Emergency powers? Anarchy is good; as long as it lasts anyway. Society requires that The-Force-Be-With-You. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-23_896_society_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-23_896_society_concepts.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, society no Fri, 08 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Society is only achieved through the use or threat of force. People don't protect you because they like you; they protect you because society has carefully allocated force: some of us are armed to make sure nobody steals from you or extorts you, and keeps the area around your home & business safe. Unfortunately, many people take society, and the safety it provides, for granted, and do not recognize the role force plays. They fall into two camps: those who think they can live insular lives without sharing their good fortune with those around them, and those who assume everyone will share equally if just indoctrinated to do so. To the first group, many of which call themselves Libertarians, are the equivalent of free-riders; they don’t understand that the streets, utilities & police aren't just something they can pay for; that there’s an implied mutual benefit contract with all of the people who provide that infrastructure. Thinking they can exploit the value of others anytime they want simply with money is naive. The second group is equally naive: they think indoctrination and brainwashing will create a society of equality & justice. These folks seem to have no understanding that all people don’t share the same values, and must be forced to do so. It takes force to make any kind of society work, some more than others. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-23_895_society_requires_force.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-23_895_society_requires_force.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, force, society no Wed, 06 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor For some reason, anarchy appeals to a lot of people, mostly the young who imagine themselves climbing to top of the chaotic heap because they're bold, strong, and have nothing to lose. Both extremes of Libertarians and Egalitarians think anarchy, combined with either radical individualism for the former or radical communitarianism for the latter, will somehow work; all they have to do is be left alone. But no one ever leaves anyone alone if they can take their stuff. Anarchists are blind like that; they don't understand that people only don’t rob you because of the consequences, or because someone with a gun is standing between them and danger. The reality is that anarchists need a military & armaments & biological weapons to defend themselves, just like before, except now there's anarchy. For entertainment's sake, imagine all the anarchists were put on a desert island with some Somalia militiamen for 24 hours, and everybody is given supplies and even some gold, and told to leave each other alone. Everybody also gets machine guns & night-vision googles. My prediction is that there will be a lot fewer of both at the end, but I'd put my money on the Somalis because they have more experience with anarchy. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-23_894_anarchy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-23_894_anarchy.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, anarchy, libertarian, egalitarian no Mon, 04 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Extreme partisanship in a split congress, one with endless phony investigations, where a president is impeached for purely political reasons, and biased news is nothing but a relentless drumbeat of negativity, has devolved into a farce of a government. Starting with Obama; if he was to have any hope of leading the country, since he couldn’t get any of his legislative agenda passed, he resorted to using Executive Orders, which are presidential decrees. Past presidents had been reticent to use Executive Orders because they could be easily abused, but Obama had no other choice. However, the problem with exploiting loopholes while you're in power is that eventually the other side will get into power, and they always take the distortion to the next level. When Trump came into office, he started his presidency with a flurry of Executive Orders, but when that was not enough, he exercised another underutilized presidential power, the National Emergency. If one president builds a wall with a National Emergency, the next will certainly declare a Climate Change National Emergency; and just think of the draconian lockdowns during the next COVID National Emergency. The two sides no longer negotiate anymore, and probably never will again; so future presidents will have to execute Executive Orders or declare National Emergencies instead; the basis of a coming Imperial Presidency. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-23_893_imperial_presidency.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-23_893_imperial_presidency.mp3 2:47 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, executive order, national emergency no Sat, 02 Jan 2021 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Voting attracts those who want power for themselves, but even more would rather the world devolve to their level. Many people are bitter, resentful, envious & perverse, and there's a lot of them. They will work against the established status quo just for the sense of satisfaction it brings them to tear it down. Combined with those who prefer authoritarianism, especially the kind that forces everyone to the lowest common denominator, and that’s a significant voting block that must be defended against; they are the enemy within, more so than Russia, China or any external threat. A sense of entitlement combined with the lack of responsibility that comes from leisure and narcissistic lifestyles, has created a generation of people full of self-loathing and contempt for authority, who not only will not defend American values but seek actively to destroy them. In the past, malcontents & revolutionaries were treated harshly, especially by religion, but the “you leave me alone and I'll leave you alone” aspect of liberty, and decline in moral institutions, has made America vulnerable. Optimistic Americans must fight against this enemy; unfortunately, they are our children. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-21_892_enemy_within.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-21_892_enemy_within.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, voting, enemy within no Thu, 31 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Compromise seems like a promising solution to deadlocked political confrontation but in practice, not so much. What kind of compromises are good compromises? Supposedly, they're the ones where everybody loses and everybody wins; sounds deep but what does that mean? Can compromise be measured? Can one side compromise more than the other? The King Solomon solution of cutting the baby in half is certainly a compromise, and the mother had to compromise 100%, giving up her child to the woman willing to let the child die. It's always been the weakness of compromise that the side that wins is the side that cares the least what the result is. This is the reason conscientious people reject to compromises. Ironically, even though compromise is intended to smooth relations among differing parties, many small compromises build up like scale, calcifying an intricate mechanism so that it doesn't run smoothly anymore. Compromises give a mixed message of how things should work, and only one generation in the future, no one will recognize that it was compromise that created the Frankenstein, but instead think the founders had some deep wisdom & understanding of the original problem that could only be dealt with an unnecessarily complex solution. Soon, all solutions are unnecessarily complex and misleading; compromising the compromises, until purity is gone and only compromise remains. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-21_891_compromises.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-21_891_compromises.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, compromise no Tue, 29 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Right & wrong, as determined by The Law, are the only morals we uniformly accept; anything further is up to the individual. Morals are also subject to democracy so what was moral for one generation can be immoral to another; and morals differ in different societies. However, many people insist that morals are universal; specifically, their morals; that’s called Western moral arrogance. Your morals mean nothing to other cultures, and certainly do not apply to history; however much you think they should. Often slavery is brought up as universally immoral, or murder, or pedophilia. Greece & Rome were pedophilia-centric;were they immoral? And if so, how is that measured? Certainly not by their success as empires which lasted thousands of years, nor as examples of modernity because that's where most of Western enlightenment came from, including democracy. In fact, history has more slavery than not; was everyone up until 200 years ago immoral? Homosexuality is accepted in many cultures; ours included, but not 30 years ago. Now, even causing offense could be prison-worthy; as it is in Canada. Calling someone’s culture immoral usually leads to deadly conflict, which seems like the most immoral thing of all. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-21_890_universal_morals.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-21_890_universal_morals.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, morals, culture, universal no Sun, 27 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor American ideals were mostly a myth but they motivated people and gave them hope, both short and long term, but now those ideals seem antiquated & anachronistic. Example: liberty to make choices for yourself and to reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of your own actions, is what The Constitution is based on. Another example is guns; that’s an American ideal literally guaranteed in The Constitution. What about Free Speech to say whatever we want even if it hurts other people’s feelings. And meritocracy determines whether someone is selected over another person. Not to mention patriotism. Our ideals also included exploration & discovery, but landing a human on Mars is no longer a priority. Instead, those ideals have been replaced with a sense of entitlement & grievance; the glorification of the famous; and a general seething perversity that would rather see everyone fail than have inequality. It's gotten so bad that at least half the nation actively rejects the old ideals. There will be new American ideals, which may even be the same as the old ones; but there's going to be some violence in-between while we settle on them again. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-19_889_ideals.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-19_889_ideals.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, ideals no Fri, 25 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Society in America has once again reached aristocracy levels, as it did at its founding, and again in the late 19th Century, but there's a lot more people, a lot more money, and a lot more anger involved now. Athletes, entertainers & politicians are the top of the class heap, followed by random famous people, then The Rich, but everyone’s a peon below that. The Elite class, politicians & bureaucrats, think they know better than everyone else, and that they should be in charge, and the rest have accepted their subservient place. The biggest sign of the stratification is the popularity of the idea of a Universal Basic Income so that the proles wouldn't have to work if they didn't want to. Ignoring how that would turn out, the fact that so many people have lost all their ambition, and worse, think they are entitled to a life of leisure and sloth, is the highest form of privileged thinking. Most people don't even want to change their station in life anymore; they're satisfied with their data service, and drinking or getting high with their friends on the weekends is considered an achievement. People understand what class they're in, and they know their place in society, and they're okay with it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-19_888_know_your_place.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-19_888_know_your_place.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, class, status no Wed, 23 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor We don't all have the same values, customs & traditions, so these are the things that define our tribe. Tribalism has its own news, its own entertainment, its own markets, and certainly its own politics. Members only do business and provide opportunities to people of their tribe. The most important value, custom & tradition is to think whatever your tribe thinks, no matter what the facts are. This is the primeval mindset; it probably has an evolutionary component because diversity is divisive. Tribes, unfortunately, get more & more insular, blaming other tribes for their grievances. In our time, the tribes are split along the winners-losers boundary, which makes them mathematically the same size; and each tribe is sure their side will win, and that truth & justice is on their side, which means a coming conflict of tribes is inevitable. In the case of the Civil War, The North won, and tribalism was held in abeyance for a century and a half, but tribes are back with a vengeance. It's gotten so bad that one tribe now takes the exact opposite stance as the other tribe, no matter the issue. When that happens, there is no negotiated settlement because there is intentionally no common ground; only one tribe can reign supreme, dominating the other tribe so that it's no longer a threat. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-19_887_tribes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-19_887_tribes.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, tribes, diversity no Mon, 21 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor There is a very famous political test that purports to determine your ideology from answering a list of questions. The reason the test has such wide appeal is that it's a simple box of four colored quadrants, and though it's difficult to understand, it's easy to comprehend. The quadrants are Liberalism, Conservatism, Socialism & Libertarianism. Liberalism is progressives, the SJW types; Conservatism is paternalism via culture & traditions; Socialism is egalitarianism, the Equality crowd; and Libertarianism is everyone out for themselves. The horizontal axis between the quadrants linearizes the differences in economic ideology: Free Markets & Capitalism vs. managed markets. The vertical axis delineates those who believe in personal liberty & autonomy, from those who believe the needs of the group supersede the wants of the individual. The very center of the box would therefore be the most complex to define because it's a mixture of all the divergent aspects, but it can be simply described as individual liberty with some socialism while regulating Free Markets. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-17_886_political_quadrants.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-17_886_political_quadrants.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, political ideology, political test no Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Let's review why there's so much voting going on: The best definition of Left, Right & Center wound be on a liberty axis. JFK Democrats have no place to go but nobody cares because there aren't enough of them left. #walkaway is what happens when your Party's ideals change but yours don't. An Anarcho-Communist is just a Communist without a gun. Every Special Interest tries to interfere with elections; that's how democracy works. There doesn't seem to be any downside to outlawing lobbying, and lots of upside. A Republic is geography-based democracy. Democracy becomes a fetish to people who aren't equal in anything else. A lot of voters are simply making a statement because they don't have enough information to do anything else. A candidate has to be on the right side of the One-Issue if they're going to have any chance of winning. Initiatives are a way for citizens to make laws without politicians. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-17_885_voting_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-17_885_voting_concepts.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, voting no Thu, 17 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor People have hardly any participation in government other than to vote for someone they don't know, and have no control over if they aren't part of the Special Interests that got the candidate elected. Initiatives are an astounding opportunity to have a say. Some States offer the idea of an initiative, a citizen-sponsored law, rather than using elected representatives. Mostly, Initiatives fail to collect enough signatures to get on the ballot, and the rest fail in the vote, but once in a while, it works and there's a new citizen-made law. However, lawmakers are jealous of their law-making privilege, and often collude with the executive branch to invalidate the new law. The argument against initiatives seems to be loss of control by the Elites who know better than citizens. Advisory votes are similar attempts by citizens to directly engage in government, but have even less impact. Advisory votes hold no authority, they are simply to gauge how popular an issue is; like building a sports center or new bridge. If an Advisory vote supports the project, status quo is maintained; but if the advisory vote fails, the Elites who made the decision have more difficulty explaining themselves. Without Advisory votes, only the government side of the issue gets aired and citizens don’t know what the counter-arguments are. Elites don't like advisory votes because they have already made up their minds, and don't want any hassle from citizens. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-17_884_initiatives.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-17_884_initiatives.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, initiatives, advisory votes no Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor For anyone who's ever voted, trying to decide on a candidate is impossible given the limited information; that's why attractive candidates have the edge; but how can an ugly candidate get elected? Many adopt the tactic of being identified with a single issue, like Pro Life. This is often a successful strategy because no matter what else another candidate may propose, no matter how qualified, talented or experienced they are, if they are on the other side of the One Issue, they're not getting those votes, period. There's both pro and con One Issue voters; those who will vote for because of it, and those who vote against because of it. In many local elections, being on the wrong side of the One-Issue dooms any candidacy, and knowing which side to be on is an exquisite balancing act. Unfortunately, the One Issue may not be something the candidate can choose; often the One Issue is being female, ethnic or young. The two political parties can also be distinguished by One Issues. For example, can you be a Republican candidate for any office if you believe in Wealth Redistribution? Can you be a Democrat candidate for any office if you support the status quo? The most ironic thing about One Issues is that they never come up in actual fact; the person elected never gets to vote on them, or even contribute to the dialog in any meaningful way. That politician was elected on a farce, which makes them a farce. One Issue voting is just another depressing example proving the futility of democracy. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-15_883_one-issue_voting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-15_883_one-issue_voting.mp3 2:53 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, vote, voters, one issue, issues no Sun, 13 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The whole idea of democracy is predicated on a majority of people using their best judgment to decide a subjective issue, but the reality is, at the individual level, voting is far from an exercise in good judgment, logic & sound thinking; the simple fact is, most people don't have enough information or experience to vote on most things, even with the 1-paragraph blurb in a Voter's Pamphlet, which they probably don't even read all the way through. What's really going on in most voter's minds is that everyone thinks they're making a statement; which means, vote for everyone in their party, or vote against every incumbent, or vote all female or minority. Making a statement is, by far, the most common way to vote, but the biggest way of making a statement is to not vote at all. Not only can later someone brag about not voting, but it's a lot more convenient and less anxiety-inducing to simply bypass the whole thing; that way the results can't be blamed on you. As cynical as the making a statement strategy sounds, it’s actually the most effective use of a vote. Most of the candidates are ineffectual or compromised to begin with, and whichever one wins makes little overall difference so, essentially, voters have no other effect in politics except as a statement of their own perversity. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-15_882_making_a_statement.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-15_882_making_a_statement.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, vote, voting, making a statement no Fri, 11 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Because Egalitarianism, the equality crowd, hasn't yet taken over America, people are still forced to recognize that all men may be born equal but we doesn't force them to stay that way; meaning the only thing that is equal is your vote, and in a Republic, even that isn't equal. This is why egalitarians have turned democracy into a fetish, because they obtain all of their power from the fact that their opinion, as expressed in their vote, has the exact same value as someone who is objectively better than them. Democracy is the root cause of the losers versus winners dynamic that defines American politics. Whereas libertyists see democracy as a flawed but effective way to make decisions in a diverse nation, egalitarians view it as a way to force their ideology onto everyone. And, of course, there's a World Democracy Index, obviously prepared by egalitarians, that purports to rank nations democracy from a series of 60 questions, and the U.S. is 25th in their rankings, making us a “Flawed Democracy,” ranking far below the egalitarian nations like Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Denmark & Ireland. (Democracy must come naturally to really white people.) But America does rank a couple spots above Botswana. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-13_881_democracy_fetishers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-13_881_democracy_fetishers.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, democracy, fetish no Wed, 09 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Invariably, whenever the word “democracy” is used to describe America, someone responds with the word “republic” as a kind of rebuke, as in: America isn't a democracy, it's a republic; though practically speaking, a republic is just geography-based democracy. Unfortunately, due to poor education, a lot of people are under the mistaken belief that America is supposed to be a popular democracy, probably because that’s how they selected the most popular person in high school, and their local elections operate like that. Tellingly, the U.S. Constitution doesn't even mention democracy, but it does describe how a republic works, and which people can't be denied a vote if there happens to be one. The distinction between a democracy and a republic is an important one at the national level because both chambers of congress are representative: the Senate at the State level, and the House at the Congressional District level. Plus, there's the Electoral College, the main target of plurality democracy advocates, because several presidents have been elected by the representative republic over the popular vote; two in the recent past. In comparison, though America is not a true democracy, Russia and China are; so our representative republic seems to have worked out okay. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-13_880_representative_republic.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-13_880_representative_republic.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, republic, representative, government no Mon, 07 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The place where the biggest impact money can make on government is lobbying; the strategy of cajoling and essentially bribing legislators to vote a particular way that has little or nothing to do with voter's interests, except perhaps negatively. Lobbyists aren't needed for issues that are obviously good for voters, so if outside influence is needed, that's how you can tell if it's lobbying, and probably suspect. Lobbyists do have to register but what does that do? Lobbyists aren't difficult to identify; they're the ones with air of superiority, sanctimonious smiles, and arrive in a private jet. There didn't used to be wholesale lobbying, and government ran better than it does today, so outlawing lobbying isn't much of a stretch; lobbying of government officials is already illegal. Elections, which can be similarly exploited, have caps on campaign contributions, so why aren't there at least caps on lobbying? The defense of lobbying is that it's no different than having an attorney represent you, but a lawyer looking out for your best interests doesn’t make it so that everyone else is also serving your best interests. That's an easy private versus public distinction, so why is there still lobbying? Because there are lobbyists who lobby for it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-11_879_outlaw_lobbying.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-11_879_outlaw_lobbying.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, lobbying no Sat, 05 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The claim of election interference is muddled because it seems to apply to what elections are: Special Interest groups trying to get their candidate into office. The distinction that it's only interference if foreigners do it is belied by the many international interests, like Climate Alarmists, Globalists & SJWs, who certainly make their preferences known in American elections. Yet the U.S. had to endure 3 years of constant Russia, Russia, Russia mantra that was a complete fabrication. Forget Russia, Israel has way more influence, China has more hackers, and what about the millions of illegal immigrants in America who vote? There are proposals to retaliate with sanctions against nations deemed to be interfering, but what about the long history of the CIA interfering in other nation’s elections? Should all nations retaliate against the U.S., applying sanctions for our interference? It's all theater, no counter-measures against interference will be enacted because those would affect all the interests the anti-interference people want interfered with. The charge of election interference is simply a pretext to attack political opponents, and possibly leverage enough support for so-called “election security” legislation, primarily from The Left, that are actually packed with all kinds of ideological goals, like Open Borders, an almost unbelievable hypocrisy encouraging even more election interference by people who don't live here. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-11_878_election_interference.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-11_878_election_interference.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, election, interference no Thu, 03 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor There are some strange hyphenated political ideologies people claim to be; for example, a Libertarian-Socialist is the ultimate oxymoron since it combines the two extremes of the Left-Right political spectrum; where radical individualism and radical authoritarianism meet together in a circle. Such a label is rhetorical gibberish, and nothing more than extreme selfishness; people who want society to do everything for them but owe nothing in return. An Anarcho-Communist is essentially the same thing. Anarcho-Communist currents have been around since the English and French Civil wars in the 17th century, and even established anarchist territories during the Spanish and Russian Revolutions, then again in North Korea. They were all quickly taken over by real Communists because of the obvious weakness of anarchy to defend itself against organized attack. Anarcho-Communists wear black balaclavas to hide their identities as they riot against any kind of coherently expressed ideology: when they break store windows, they are Anti-Fascists, when they throw Molotov cocktails, they are Anti-Globalists; and if they weren't wearing masks, everyone would be able to tell what dorks they are. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-09_877_anarcho-communist.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-09_877_anarcho-communist.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, anarcho-communist no Tue, 01 Dec 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor As the Democrat party radicalizes more and more towards egalitarianism, authoritarianism, even Communism; the people left behind are one-by-one recognizing they no longer fit into the ideology; but it's difficult to leave what is essentially a religion, so spontaneously, a support group popped up called #walkaway, where people post videos of themselves explaining their reasons for leaving the Democrat party. It's eerily similar to AA meetings, and serves much the same purpose of providing moral support during a time of turmoil & angst. The problem is, the apostates are left with no representation, since neither side of the political divide considers them their ally. This is perhaps the biggest weakness of a 2-Party system because democracy is used to stabilize society, but it only works if the vast majority of people feel they at least had their say. The number of #walkawayers could become significant; either the Republican party expands its umbrella to include them, or they regain control of the Democrat party, or there will be consequences, because these are just the people who won't wait around to be Disappeared when one of the sides eventually takes over. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-09_876_walkaway.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-09_876_walkaway.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, walkaway, Democrat no Sun, 29 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Democrats and Republicans were not always so partisan as they are now. Through a fluke of history, the Civil War, many were “Blue Dog” Democrats, primarily from the South, who had a lot in common with Republicans, but they were racists, and Republicans freed the slaves, so these legislators became Democrats out of perversity. When there’s a block of people who think like you but they’re on the other side, coalitions can be made, so they would often cross Party lines to vote with Republicans. A lot of bipartisan legislation was passed during the time of this anomaly, which lasted several generations. However, by this millennium, that aberration has disappeared, and cross-party coalitions are a rarity. Now, because there is diversity, there is divergence, and once sacrosanct ideals, like liberty & freedom, are under serious debate. The model Democrat used to be President John F. Kennedy; his inauguration speech included the famous phrase, “we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of liberty.” That is no longer true; for the past decade, the ideology of the Democrat party has slipped more and more into egalitarianism & collectivism, until it’s now closer to Communism than it is to JFK's Democrats, leaving JFK Democrats no where to go. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-07_875_jfk_democrats.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-07_875_jfk_democrats.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Blue Dog Democrats, JFK Democrats no Fri, 27 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor In political comments, it seems everybody has their own definition of Left & Right, which leaves Center a no-man's-land. This confusion arises because the words have become accusations rather than descriptive terms. However, with the radicalization of The Left, and its tight association with Social Justice & Identity Politics, a clearer distinction has arisen: liberty, personal autonomy, individuals making decisions for themselves and reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of their actions, is Right; so Libertarians would be hard Right. Egalitarian-thinking, equality, from each according to their ability to each according to their need, is Left; so Marxists would be hard Left. Obviously, somewhere between those two concepts is Center. Boiled down to its essence, the ideological difference is the nature of responsibility: Right is you are responsible to yourself, and you are in charge of yourself; versus Left, where others are responsible for you, or in charge of you. Those are completely conflicting attitudes, which leaves no natural Center, so it has to be defined pragmatically. If America is to maintain its liberty-democracy nature, then Center would be the place where liberty still benefits the majority so that they would vote for it. Unfortunately, once liberty is lost, the Center is no longer obtainable. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-07_874_definition_of_left__right__center.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-07_874_definition_of_left__right__center.mp3 2:43 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, left, right, center no Wed, 25 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Reviewing your opportunities is always a good bet: Losers will always try to reverse the scales against the winners. Modern feudalism is just feudalism without the starvation. Everyone's a slave; it's simply a matter of definition. Lucky societies are the ones that accommodate lucky people. The youth need to get back to following opportunity rather than passion. Free Markets don't need Capitalism, but Capitalism needs Free Markets. You're not really committed unless you drink Coke and sleep under your desk. Incompetent people aren't just going away... Everybody loves a lottery winner. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-05_873_opportunity_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-05_873_opportunity_concepts.mp3 2:06 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, opportunity no Mon, 23 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor One thing everyone can do, even the most incompetent, is buy a lottery ticket. In America, wealth is so admired that it makes no difference where it comes from: earned, inherited, stolen, and especially lottery winnings. Everyone is both glad & envious when they hear someone wins the lottery because it proves that they too may also win the lottery someday; so people buy lottery tickets even though the chances are winning are essentially nil. The power of this naive optimism cannot be understated: abjectly poor people will remain placated as long as they believe there's even a small chance of breaking out of their miserable lives, even though it is a not so subtle tax, it's one people are willing, even anxious, to pay. This winning-the-lottery mentality is what our society is built on, because the American Dream sells the “success” story to people. Even if there’s only a 1% chance of anyone personally making it big, but somebody they know does: maybe their kid, or their uncle, or the hard-working lady at their church; that's enough. However, if even that remote chance is taken away, revolution beckons. As real opportunity dwindles, it makes the ability to buy a lottery ticket all the more important, so we can broadcast the winners’ giant smiles on television. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-05_872_winning_the_lottery.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-05_872_winning_the_lottery.mp3 2:31 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, lottery, optimism no Sat, 21 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor 10% of the population, that's people with an IQ lower than 86, are incurable incompetents who will fail spectacularly if left to their own devices. They can’t even enlist in the military because they require too much oversight. Most incompetent people don’t graduate from High School, and many of the ones that do, shouldn’t have. Plus, a lot of people get incompetent as they get older. The big problem is that our society is getting more and more complicated, and incompetents have no place to go except Welfare or the streets. As it turns out, in a society as productive as ours, 10% is 30-50 million people in American that cannot produce more than they consume, however, it's small enough to ignore, which is what we do. Everybody working would be a far better solution for social stability reasons, but these people are not competent enough to do anything worth paying for, and the only jobs they could have done were “Free” Traded away; there's not nearly enough jobs at the Salvation Army or any charitable organization. Incompetent people require such heavy supervision that it's not cost effective to keep them, so of course, any business would get rid of them. That’s the problem: incompetent people consume more time & effort than they’re worth if you’re just talking economics. There would have to be incentives to businesses that agreed to take care of them, but then up pops the Living Wage argument that demonizes employers who do this; stalemate on conscientious behavior. The egalitarian Left exists because of the difficulty of incorporating incompetent people into a modern society. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-05_871_incompetents.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-05_871_incompetents.mp3 2:46 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, incompetent no Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Ambition is the spark of business but capability & commitment are close seconds; and all three are supercharged by testosterone. This explains why almost all scions of business are male because it's all about the status & power, from which comes the attention of females, propagating a line of human beings with ambition, capability & commitment, who eventually walked on the moon. Evolution knew what it was doing. On a more personal scale, I witnessed this phenomena as a computer programmer and termed it “drink coke, sleep under your desk” because during an all-nighter, there would always be at least a couple young male programmers getting some sleep curled up under their desk; and invariably there would be a forest of empty Coke cans on top. Predictably, there would never be any females under their desks but evolution had them at home with the future ambitious, capable & committed children. Successful societies rewards this kind of synergy; it's what makes them lucky. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-05_870_drink_coke__sleep_under_your_desk.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-05_870_drink_coke__sleep_under_your_desk.mp3 1:56 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, ambition, capability, commitment no Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Capitalism rides the coat-tails of Free Markets, but markets don't require Capitalism. Capitalism is using money to make money but Markets use productivity to make money; the former is imaginary, the latter is real. Because Capitalism is a made up game, it's easy to exploit the rules. If you were explaining Capitalism to a child, it would go something like this: “Imagine you have money; that means you don't have to work, so you can play all day & eat ice cream; but if you don't have money, you'll need to dig ditches every day and worry about bills.” Of course, your child would ask “What's money?” Won't you feel silly answering, “Oh, that's imaginary.” This distinction is lost on most people who conflate Free Markets with Capitalism because they think Socialism is bad. Socialism tries to manage markets, which requires predicting the future; which is why Socialism is bad, not why Capitalism is good. Free Markets use Emergent Order, which doesn't require anybody predicting anything, events occur spontaneously, like nature. There doesn't have to be a Stock Market or non-participating investors for Free Markets to work. Those artifices, the Capitalism parts, were just tacked onto markets to make them work better and more efficiently. The side-effect was those artificial things could be manipulated, so too many people got a lot of imaginary money for doing nothing, and once they had it, their heirs could do nothing too. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-03_869_markets_vs_capitalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-03_869_markets_vs_capitalism.mp3 2:53 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, capitalism, markets no Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Another of the core Protestant Work Ethic values that is deteriorating is the idea of taking your best opportunities, which has been replaced with the egocentric idea of pursing your passion. This is one of the manifestations of selfish liberty, the egalitarian kind without responsibility, where individuals are trying for maximum happiness, as judged by themselves. Unfortunately, almost everybody's “passion” is to be the center of everything, and if they can't get that then they remain unhappy; it's disenchantment caused by delusion masquerading as good advice. Without the concept of best opportunity, needed jobs go lacking while superficial activity, and plain sloth, are accepted. For example, for almost everyone in the military, that was the best opportunity for them, even if it's dangerous. Similarly, if there's a high-paying oil field job in North Dakota; that’s opportunity even if it’s far away from everything; hauling garbage is steady work, but has low status; and ditches need dug, though it's back-breaking labor. Encouraging children to desire irrelevant, eve mystical, goals is destructive, and only possible when a society has been so productive that its most privileged members take it for granted, and want to be even more privileged, when instead they should be following their best opportunity. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-03_868_best_opportunity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-03_868_best_opportunity.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, opportunity, passion no Fri, 13 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Why are Western societies so lucky? If you examine the history of America, for example, its establishment and expansion was just one lucky incident after another; it couldn't have been planned. There was no grand strategy fashioned by the Founding Fathers; they were simply the right people in the right place at the right time; in short, they were lucky. Societies are lucky because the people in them are lucky; not all the people, of course, but there's enough lucky people to make things happen, and Western societies allow them to retain the rewards of their luck, encourage it even. Obviously, the question of lucky societies boils down to the nature of luck. Luck exits: you've certainly been lucky yourself on occasion; and luck is distributed like any random event, so on a societal level, there are some percentage of people who accomplish their goals, not necessarily because they have more merit than others but they are definitely luckier. At the extreme head of the curve, there are people who have had extraordinary luck; they've flipped heads ten times in a row, so to speak, and no one begrudges them, because if society builds on their luck, it can land a man in the moon. Recognizing how important luck is, societies that focus on the lucky accomplish great things, while those societies that hold back for the unlucky get mired down. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-01_867_lucky_societies.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-01_867_lucky_societies.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, luck, society no Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Everybody's a slave: conscientiousness is the yoke, and personal attachments are the chains; obligations are just as binding as cold iron. There are all kinds of slavery: you're a slave to your family, a slave to your job, and certainly a slave to your responsibilities. It's not just metaphorical, there are also tangible measurements of slavery: how big is your Student Loan debt? How many more years do you have to serve in the military? When do the Child Support payments end?   We're slaves held in velvet handcuffs: a monthly cable television bill and payments for a nice car, who eat so much we have to lose weight, with soft beds we can't sleep in due to anxiety. One of the disgraces of traditional slavery was the exploitation of sex, but that hasn't changed, just the whip has; and most people have no control over their lives; government or business or society orders them what to do. The gifts of modernity are still slavery wrapped in a different package. We know because people who subconsciously recognize their slavery exhibit what Nietzsche termed “slave morality,” a perversity-based egalitarianism; just looking at the rising popularity of ideologies like feminism, environmentalism, intersectionality, and even blatant Marxism; it's obvious that slavery is as endemic as it ever has been. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-01_866_everyones_a_slave.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-01_866_everyones_a_slave.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, slavery, modern no Mon, 09 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Conservative Americans dismiss the threat of modern feudalism as an idea from Medieval times, not applicable in an era of personal liberty. But in a very real way, average people now are just as much vassals, and the elites are more than lords, than anytime in history. It's not a slavery situation, even in the past there was a veneer of commoners being paid in some way; low-wage jobs are the modern form of feudalism. How is a multi-billionaire that owns vast tracts of wilderness where only they can go, with imprisonment threatened against anyone who dares trespass, any different than the feudal penalties for hunting on lord's estates. French kings allowed peasants into the castle to see how royalty lived, including watching sexual congress between the gentry; and in these times, whole reality television series are centered around that very premise. It's all there: the modern fixation on movie & pop stars; the idolization of the rich & famous; the rise of the political & pundit class into dynasties; the same families intermarrying, doing business with each other and concentrating power among themselves. Even at the extremes; who doubts that the old custom of a lord sleeping with another man’s wife on their wedding night could be made common practice if enough money was involved? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-30_865_modern_feudalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-30_865_modern_feudalism.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wealth, concentration no Sat, 07 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Politics will always be the losers against the winners. The winners want to maintain the status quo because they already have control, and whatever sophistry the losers use as justification for overturning the established order can be ignored because they simply want control. In a democracy, as long as the numbers aren't too lopsided, the status quo will continue because it takes a lot more losers versus a single winner to change anything, but those numbers are raising because the winners aren't making sure there are enough themselves. Winners continue to exploit the power of compounding gains to accumulate everything, but they eventually have to share, the easy way or the hard way. The most popular philosophy of losers is egalitarianism, equality, which imposes sharing on the winners. Using median wealth as a dividing line, by definition, half the people are in the loser camp; however, using the mean, the average, especially when the winners have vast concentrations of wealth, way more than half the people are losers. Pundits are correct to suspect a war between the winners and losers is coming because it’s always coming, because there’s always losers, and without wealth redistribution of some kind, the ratio of losers to winners will continue to increase. Frustratingly, all the winners in this contest have to do is not engage in nepotism and stop creating dynasties, but that’s the way our biology works, so though the solution is obvious, it seems unlikely to be implemented. The inevitable result will make them losers too. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-30_864_winners_vs_losers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-30_864_winners_vs_losers.mp3 2:50 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, wealth, redistribution no Thu, 05 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The concept of racism definitely needs review: Stereotypes are racist but so is everything else. Intersectionality is the idea that some people are owed based on past grievances. Your Intersectionality Score determines your place in the grievance hierarchy based on traits you have no control over – kind of like racism. The new definition of racism doesn't include the actual racists. All things can be considered racist if you stare at them long enough. Time is racist because why wouldn't it be? Reparations are reverse slavery. The new view of racism is the opposite of color blind. If there really are such things as Nazis, I've never met one. White Nationalists are like Black Nationalists, except they're white. Get woke, what a joke. The diversity gods require that you worship them with pledges & oaths. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-28_863_racism_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-28_863_racism_concepts.mp3 2:44 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, intersectionality, racism no Tue, 03 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor The quest for diversity has jumped the shark; colleges and businesses have started hiring Vice Presidents of Diversity. What are these people to do in such a high-level job? The result is frightening: now as part of the job application process, the three things an applicant must include are a resume, Applicant letter, and a mandatory Diversity Oath. The Oath isn’t just a check box or signature, it's required to be a written personal commitment to “diversity,” listing exactly what the applicant is going to do to promote it. If the Oath is not up to the VP of Diversity’s subjective diversity standards, the application is rejected without even notifying the applicant why. This isn’t even a subtle attempt to keep diversity of thought out of education. Similarly, now to renew a Law license in Canada, the applicant must swear a diversity pledge. Very worrisome, there are some U.S. State bars considering this requirement too. Another example: Washington State government has stated their three goals, one of which is diversity, but honesty & integrity didn't get listed. Diversity indoctrination is everywhere, yet diversity is not a goal listed in America's founding, nor is it compatible with personal liberty and Freedom of Association. Luckily, people are starting to fight back against this authoritative overreach. Just like Loyalty Oaths were found to be odious, diversity is even more divisive. If there’s going to be oaths on job applications, the only one allowed should be to not require one. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-28_862_diversity_oaths.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-28_862_diversity_oaths.mp3 2:56 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, diversity oath no Sun, 01 Nov 2020 07:00:00 -0800 politics & humor Wokeness was made popular by Black Lives Matter during the last decade. It's supposed to be applied to Whites who acknowledge their racist guilt and wallow in self-loathing because of it. It's not a quest for knowledge or redemption; Whites don't get points for consciousness of their wokeness; in fact, their very mention of how woke they are is deemed cultural appropriation. The idea is to get woke and shut-up about it then submit to any race-hustler scheme that would make things more equal; like diversity hires, affirmative action and, of course, reparations. Unfortunately, being woke has become fashionable among young people: for example, MTV News identified it as a key teen slang word for 2016; and there's an acclaimed movie, “Dear White People,” that even had a followup TV show. Then there’s the whole Colin Kaepernick debacle, the NFL quarterback turned woketivist, who started kneeling during the national anthem. Nike even pulled an image of the Betsy Ross flag off of it's shoe honoring America's independence; the reason being that it was racist because it was around during slavery. Being “woke” is The Left's rebuttal to getting “red-pilled,” except it's poisonous. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-28_861_wokeness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-28_861_wokeness.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, woke no Fri, 30 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor It's tough to tell the difference between White Supremacists, White Separatists & White Nationalists because all 3 terms have been demonized by conflating them so no one wants to admit they can tell. The White Supremacist label evokes another time, one modern sensibilities can't quite grasp because clearly, Whites are not on the top of the intelligence scale. It's particularly difficult to separate White Separatists from White Nationalists; they might even be the same thing? The argument used by White Nationalists isn’t that people with pale skin are better than anyone else, but that “good fences make good neighbors.” They think the world is big enough for every Identity Group to have their own piece; as impractical as that may be in reality. To egalitarians, Whites are the ones on the hook for Reparations, and they dare not think they can leave. There's also Black Nationalists but they don't get a lot of air time on the MSM. As innocuous as remaining separate seems, a concept at the heart of most religions, the idea has been integrated into the Scapegoating Whites narrative as something unforgivable. Ask Google, “What's wrong with White Nationalism?” and there is no answer to that question; instead there are endless links about “hate” groups. This narrative virulently plays itself out in social media: Facebook has determined that White Nationalism is White Supremacy, and has redirected all searching of those terms to a website called “Life After Hate.” Personally, I think the idea of any kind of separatism is idiotic, but the Amish seem to like it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-26_860_white_nationalists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-26_860_white_nationalists.mp3 3:04 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, white nationalist, white separatist, white supremacist no Wed, 28 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The word "Nazi" has entered the realm of Oral Illusions as a way to control a narrative. I've never met a Nazi of any kind. When Antifa doxxed a couple supposedly Neo-Nazis near where I live, I emailed them to see if they would join my political forum, and tell me what it was they are thinking? But they never responded after multiple attempts, so I don't know how real that was; they were probably imaginary Nazis. I've also heard of White Nationalists, and White Supremacists, but those groups just seem like boogeymen; I don’t know any, and I’ve never talked to any either. Conversely, I can get onto Facebook and find a Marxist in just a few minutes. Those people are real and they are very dangerous. Many dress up as Antifa; in fact, I think they are Antifa; and they do commit violence; yet I have seen "Nazi" applied literally hundreds of times to non-violent people who look and think like me, therefore I must be a Nazi too. Apparently “Nazi” is the N-word for liberty-minded white males, in which case I embrace my Nazihood, and understand why Antifa who would come to my house to hurt me. And if there are any real Nazis, you're welcome to come over to my house too, so that I can see you actually exist, and to explain your ideology to me. Caution: if you're not firm in your understanding of what you’re for, I’ve been known to convince people to my way of thinking; you probably won't walk away a Nazi. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-26_859_are_there_really_nazis.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-26_859_are_there_really_nazis.mp3 2:45 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Nazi, Antifa no Mon, 26 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor In the 1960s, America decided it was going to “fix” its race problem. It got a lot of news coverage, and incessantly talked about in politics, even getting some serious Civil Rights legislation passed in 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965, and 1968; and it went right to the big gun: indoctrination. Starting young, the first day of kindergarten perhaps, school kids began being taught that all people should be treated the same; that they shouldn’t even see race. The brainwashing worked; the generation that grew up during those decades were color blind. It seemed like discrimination in its raw form had been defeated. Unfortunately, poor inner-city minorities didn't turn out any differently; maybe worse? Discussing the causes of this civic failure are highly controversially, but beginning in the new millennium, with the advent of egalitarian sensibilities, the causes became immaterial; the only solutions were in the form of making people equal. Color blindness was decried as racist because it absolved the responsibility of white people to make things equal. In a complete reversal of the previous half-century, recognizing the differences in races was celebrated because if the solution to inequality is to take from one group and give to another, then defining the groups on the basis of color benefits those who have it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-24_858_color_blind.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-24_858_color_blind.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, color blind, racism no Sat, 24 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Reparations is the proposed solution to correct past injustices in the pantheon of all things must be made equal. The concept of Reparations violates the liberal doctrine that sons are not responsible for the sins of their fathers, but egalitarianism is decidedly not liberal; in fact, it's illiberal. It's quite disorienting to hear advocating of reverse-slavery because we are so habituated to arguing with the colors switched, however, since it comes up so often and has become doctrinaire in the Democrat Party; Reparations must be examined objectively: Who pays money to who? How much? How long? Who decides? Are Reparations only to people with black skin? How black? Are dark people from Australia or India black? Do all people with black skin get the money or do they have to trace their ancestry back to slavery? What about the people in the ghettos who don't trace back to slavery? What about recent immigrants? What about Illegal immigrants? Are just white people supposed to pay Reparations? Are light-skinned people from Mexico White? Are Asians supposed to pay too? Is there partial credit for past good deeds like a white relative dying in the Civil War? Would a one time payment do it, or would it be recurring until equality was achieved? Is the payment means-tested, meaning do rich black people get just as much money as poor black people? What about the half of the white population that don't make enough to pay taxes; is their responsibility to the past simply abdicated? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-24_857_reparations.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-24_857_reparations.mp3 2:45 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, reparations no Thu, 22 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The All Things R Racist category now includes the concepts of “on time” and “time efficiency.” Apparently, the very idea that a person should use their time wisely and productively is a creation of Whites. According to diversity training guidelines, expecting people from other cultures to show up on time is racist, and chastising them for being late is oppressive. In fact, the claim goes so far as to insist that white people own time; that the concept of time comes out of histories of European thought. Apparently time is an unwanted cultural appropriation. I’ve traveled a lot and I can attest that many other cultures do not hold as high an appreciation of time as I do: everything is dirty, trash is everywhere, and no one feels any urgency toward repairs so nothing works, certainly not something as complicated as a flush toilet. In the spirit of equality, as penance for forcing time management onto other races, instead Whites should slow down, or better yet, as reparations, become the time slaves of those who they been oppressing time after time. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-22_856_time_is_racist.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-22_856_time_is_racist.mp3 2:19 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, racism, time is racist no Tue, 20 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor With the new definition of racism, one Martin Luther King wouldn't even recognize, where only white people can be racist; it turns out things can be racist too. The list is long but here are some examples: Credit scores, Car insurance, Crime statistics, Halloween costumes, Disney movies, White chefs who make burritos, Milk, Tanning, Math, Science, Proper English grammar, Patriotism, Makeup, The SAT, Electronic music, Pornography, Families, Nostalgia, Soda taxes, Bulletproof glass, Property taxes, School grades, Background checks, Atheism, Capitalism, Socialism & Marxism, Highways, Diabetes, Climate Change, Pollution, The Bible, Police, Snow, Witches, Fairytales, Beauty pageants, Lies, Swans, Sheep, Rhinos, Dreadlocks, Hard work, Flour, Salt, Sugar, The American Way, Cartoons, Cold, The Winter Olympics, Solar eclipses, Air, Dogs, Babies, Farmer’s Markets, Obesity, McDonald’s, Craft beer, and of course, Time. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-22_855_racist_things.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-22_855_racist_things.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, racism, racist things no Sun, 18 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The traditional definition of racism was someone who judged other people, not from the content of their character, but by the color of their skin. This concept may sound familiar; it's a twist of Martin Luther King's famous quote, and was the definition of racism up until this millennium. American law requires both action & intent for something to be criminal, and assumes we cannot read another person's thoughts, so an act could not be racist unless there was evidence of a person’s thoughts that went along with it. There's also some evidence that racism in the technical sense, subconscious stereotyping on the basis of color, is instinctual, but cognitive humans can easily suppress such feelings. Whatever the thoughts are, if there is no act, there is no racism; at least that's the way it used to be... But with the advent of intersectionality, racism has been radically redefined; most strategic for the race hustlers, now only whites can be called “racist;” the word isn't even applicable to anyone else; and unfortunately, whites are born racist and have no ability to overcome their racism; consequently no other evidence is required, and no act has to occur; and since racism is a form of oppression, it explains why nonwhite people require equity; meaning whites are morally obligated to give up some of what they have to the people who have been oppressed, just to equal things up. That's social justice; and whites really have no say in the matter. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-20_854_racism_definition.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-20_854_racism_definition.mp3 2:57 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, intersectionality, racism no Fri, 16 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Intersectionality, the new face of egalitarianism, purports to be analytical, and has a simple test to “calculate your oppression, gain social justice for the marginalized, fight oppression, and make America great.” It consists of 13 sliders labeled: white, straight, male, cisgender, rich, young, able-bodied, English first language, born in USA, higher education, Christian, Muslim & Jewish. They claim that the Intersectionality score measures the systematic oppression & discrimination faced by an individual due to their multiple identity factors, and that the score can be used in an office setting to give exclusive opportunities & promotions to people with high scores. They also recommend a group meeting for everyone to compare their scores, even encouraging the use of the calculator on other people to identify oppressors. However, it does warn that a high score doesn't completely immunize someone from being called an oppressor from someone even more disadvantaged; giving the example that a gay black man could still be accused of being a misogynist by a poor, immigrant woman. So far over 1.2 million people have taken the test. The most up-ranked comment on the page was: “It's condescending, patronizing crap like this, dressed up in academic verbiage like a pig in makeup, which at last exposes the intellectual derangement of mainstream progressivism.” Finagling the sliders, I was able to get the lowest “2” score, and found the age slider made no difference or I'd be a “0.” The Intersectionality score farce concludes with the claim: “all scores are accurate.” politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-20_853_intersectionality_score.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-20_853_intersectionality_score.mp3 3:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, intersectionality no Wed, 14 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The fundamental ideological split in politics, any politics, anywhere, is the winners vs. losers of the status quo; it's a simple fact that half the population will benefit from taking from the other half. Few people want to state it as blatantly as that because it warns those from who the taking will occur, so instead, language is distorted and conclusions are assumed; the biggest one being that we all should be equal. Of course, that's not true, but people who would benefit from that assumption immediately start proposing solutions, all of which are eventually discredited, like Communism. But new ways to wrap the old egalitarian package continually pop up; the newest is called Intersectionality. Intersectionality proposes that a person's identity consists of multiple, intersecting factors: gender, race, ethnicity, class, sexuality, weight, height, appearance, and any other distinguishing characteristic that one feels is causing others to have some kind of control over them, usually in the form of discrimination; that discrimination is the reason there isn't equality, and oppression is the way the inequality is maintained. Intersectionality assumes things would be naturally equal except for exploitation by privileged people of oppressed people, and even claims to be able to analytically measure that oppression and use the score to triage corrective measures; such as affirmative action, diversity quotas & reparations. From those to those until equality is achieved, with the intersectionalists deciding what & when that is. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-18_852_intersectionality.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-18_852_intersectionality.mp3 2:52 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, intersectionality no Mon, 12 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Jews are smart; Mexicans work hard; Asians persevere. Stereotypes are good more often than they aren't, and the impression only lasts for the first minute anyway, then the person underneath comes through. Preconceptions are how the human brain works; an oak tree is an icon in your head; you know it will lose its leaves in the winter without waiting for it to happen. How could we, as humans with all the myriad information we are presented with every single second, possibly operate without stereotypes; and since other people are our most important interactions, and there's a lot of them, stereotypes are invaluable as lubrication in a polite & courteous society; whether it be about culture, sex, religion, body, beauty or origin. The few things, like skin color, that don't mean anything and tend towards discrimination, can easily be singled out and discouraged in childhood. I'm an old, white, male, and am treated like one the instant someone meets me for the first time. Some people on The Left immediately emanate a feeling of disgust bordering on hate, and they don't even know me; they are working off their stereotype. Yet these are the same people who disclaim & condemn the stereotypes I may have about them. The hypocrisy is overwhelming, and must be pushed-back against. Here's the deal: I won't care about your stereotype of me as long as you don't act on it negatively, and vice versa. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-18_851_stereotypes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-18_851_stereotypes.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, stereotypes no Sat, 10 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor What things in the business environment need review? Modern Monetary Theory is a non-modern theory that money is imaginary. The Money Supply can't be measured because it’s unlimited. There hasn't been much devaluation of the dollar because the alternative currencies are worse. Negative interest rates force people to spend their money or to invest. Without profit motive, society would be farming with oxen. Stock buybacks are a completely corrupt method of manipulating the Stock Market. Public-Private Partnerships are mostly private; the public just pays for it. When did business & politics ever mix that it turned out okay? Small Business can't save money so why should Big Business be able to? It's better for society to subsidize employees than simply pay them Welfare. Professional licensing is little more than gatekeeping for the benefit those already licensed. “Made In China” needs to go back to having a bad reputation. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-16_850_business_environment_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-16_850_business_environment_concepts.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, business, capitalism, stock buybacks, MMT, Modern Monetary Theory no Thu, 08 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor China's stated national policy is “One Sun,” meaning they want to be the World's leader. They don't have the military might but they do know how to exploit the inherent greed of Capitalism. There's a reason the U.S. always had cold relations with China, because a Communist-dictatorship is as far from liberty as it gets, but of all the disastrous policies implemented by president Clinton, opening trade relations with China topped the list. How could China possible make things so much cheaper without exploiting something? The fact that their debt is almost 4x their GNP is the first hint: China uses the power of imaginary money to subsidize its exports. This ends up concentrating all manufacturing to them, including strategic supplies like drugs, medical equipment, and essential computer parts, so that China is the only source. And they require that foreign manufacturers, like Apple, surrender any intellectual secrets. Also, unlike the West, China doesn't allow foreigners to own property or business: China is for the Chinese. Contrarily, China is buying up oil fields and shipping ports in the U.S. Trade with China is a timebomb about to go off, stopping trade with them, but American manufacturers can make anything we need, and there is plenty of cheap land and unemployed people in the Fly-over States. The happy result being, Walmart quits buying the widget from China and instead buys it from an American company for a few cents more, while paying American workers and American taxes; and to ensure international Market Forces keep prices in check; India, Japan & SE Asia are waiting in the wings. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-16_849_made_in_china.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-16_849_made_in_china.mp3 2:46 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, china, trade, made in no Tue, 06 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor As odd as it may seem, a lawyer in California can't practice in Washington State without a license; neither can doctors, accountants, or engineers? And the requirements to become licensed in another State are not uniform: some require more years of medical residency, or a different kind of Bar exam, or more professional references. There's no way people who have never gotten one of these licenses have any idea how difficult they are to get; in fact, many novices thinks a license comes along with a degree: get an Engineering degree; bam, you're a Professional Engineer. There are lots graduates of Medical or Law school out there who couldn't license for one reason or another; usually the proficiency exam or the number of years required as a journeyman. Licenses are a significant barrier to entry to performing something people were formally trained to do. The reason all this is important is because professional licensing, whatever the justification given by the licensing agencies, which are mostly private organizations, is to keep competitors out of the field. Licensing is the purest form of gatekeeping, an intentional market distortion, the way people already in the business maintain their artificial scarcity. There may be a case for a doctor to prove competence once, but certainly not State-by-State. And to make things more blatant, there's no reason at all to license contractors and hairdressers. If there has to be licensing, it should be strictly justified, consistent, and applicable all over the world. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-16_848_professional_licensing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-16_848_professional_licensing.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, professional licensing, licensing, professions, gatekeeping no Sun, 04 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The argument for both a Minimum wage and a Living wage make an employer responsible for the choices and circumstances of their employees. In a Free Market, employers pay what a job is worth to them, not what the employee wants. If picking up trash, washing dishes, babysitting, etc. cost too much, they won't get done, but these jobs teach Work Ethic, especially to those who need it, which is extremely valuable to society. Most employers would go ahead and hire someone who's untrained or unproductive, and oversee them, just to help out, but if they had to pay more, forget it; let somebody else carry the burden. The often-heard example that Walmart employees can't afford healthcare is a condemnation of the high cost of healthcare in America, not Walmart, who's just looking for a part-time stockboy. If a society wants higher wages then society should pay for them: let Markets figure out what a job is worth, then government can subsidize them through Welfare. A lot of people are simply incompetent in life for one reason or another; they consume more than they can produce, and need government assistance; that’s what Welfare’s for. However, it’s a sliding scale, some need lower levels of assistance; those ones can work performing low-wage jobs with Welfare filling the gap. Potential low wage workers sitting at home getting government money doing nothing because there's nothing they can do worth paying a living wage for, is a bad idea, and generates a lot of resentment & animosity from working people. Arguments against subsidizing marginal employees are either sanctimonious, egalitarian, or people who claim it will cause higher taxes; and none factor in the value to society of teaching people how to work. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-16_847_subsidized_employees.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-16_847_subsidized_employees.mp3 2:56 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, welfare, employees. Living Wage, Minimum Wage no Fri, 02 Oct 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Small business literally can't save money for a rainy day or future expansion because they must pass the profits through to the owners, so it's the owners, not the business, doing those things. Most small business owners obviously don't do their own taxes because it's amazing how many of them don't understand that they pay personal taxes on all the business's profits at their own federal tax rates, plus Self Employment tax on what they consider their salary. What they leave in the business is essentially a new loan to the business. 99% of businesses are pass through like this. Small businesses finance through founder loans, bank loans, or stock; however, 1% of business, the giant C corps, can save money, which is one of the biggest distortions of the Capitalist System. These companies exploit their ability to hoard cash to slight their shareholders, bypass federal taxes, and subsidize the lifestyles of The Rich. They rarely hand out the profits in the form of dividends, and when they do, The Rich pay only a fraction of taxes they would normally pay because they're subsidized by all the other stockholders. If the corporation was not allowed to save profits, then The Rich would have to pay taxes on their income at their own progressive tax rates. If corporations couldn't save money, they wouldn't have elaborate off-shore tax schemes, they would be more likely to reinvest, or reward their stockholders. It would be better for everyone involved if no business be allowed to save money. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-14_846_small_business_cant_save_money.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-14_846_small_business_cant_save_money.mp3 2:44 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, small business, big business no Wed, 30 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor When I went to Business school, we were taught to stay out of politics, only unethical businesses had lobbyists, and business certainly shouldn't identify their partisanship by giving campaign contributions. Boy, how things have changed; not only are businesses unafraid to take sides, they are actually partners with advocacy groups interfering with the Rights of their customers. It's scary that credit-card companies have been cutting off service to businesses whose politics they don't agree with; and sporting goods chains now self-select who they will sell guns to. Big Tech is the scariest of these ideological takeovers: filtering search results, blocking access, redefining & censoring speech; because there's no alternative information source. How this happened was that Lefty activists have been getting on the boards of these giant international organizations, and in cahoots with Diversity hires, have been flanking The Right who thought business was immune. Anyone who noticed and warned what was happening were dismissed as cranks, and now that battle has been lost. There are new Conservative businesses opening up; some are the fastest growing in the nation; and Conservatives could still organize and buy back control of Big Business; however, the ever-increasing politicization of business will probably lead to “Conservatives Welcome” or "No Democrats Allowed" signs in the near future. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-14_845_politicizing_business.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-14_845_politicizing_business.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, politicizing business no Mon, 28 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor One of the buzzwords you'll hear in government circles is “public-private partnerships.” This concept really started to gain steam in the 1970s as the so-called “Reagan Revolution” occurred when Baby-Boomers started voting to lower taxes and increase government benefits. What used to be covered by the public coffers: university tuition, infrastructure, utilities; found themselves without funding, and government desperately grasped at whatever straw was offered. Private industry was there to make a devil's bargain: they would provide the money if the operation was turned into a profitable enterprise for them; hence, for-profit transportation, communication, and healthcare. Worse, it was the difference between government accounting practices and generally accepted accounting principles that let elected officials con the public into these unequal, ridiculously byzantine contracts without anybody being the wiser; news sources certainly didn't seem to know or care what hidden obligations the public was being saddled with. And it didn't stop there: anywhere government officials thought they could pursue their own unfunded pet projects, they went to the private sector and prostituted out public goods: sports stadiums, broadcast bandwidth, toll roads & bridges, hospitals, and anything else that the public could be badgered into paying for, all under the guise of “it’s good for everyone.” However, whatever public-private partnerships were supposed to be, of course, like all unsupervised power, they're actually conduits for graft, bribes, monopolies, market distortion & sweetheart jobs for government official’s children. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-12_844_public-private_partnerships.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-12_844_public-private_partnerships.mp3 3:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, public private partnership no Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The stock market is held aloft by companies buying their own stock, and people assume that's a good thing because they naively think that a company wouldn't do that unless they knew everything was copacetic, but the truth is almost the exact opposite. First, stock buybacks are a scheme to increase corporate earnings per share because there are fewer shares outstanding per the profit, which triggers big bonuses for the CEO and other managers. Secondly, companies buy back their stock to intentionally increase its price then reissue new shares to take advantage of the increased price they precipitated in the first place. It's an easy way for a company to make money by manipulating the game, and sometimes the only way a company makes money. Normally, such a scheme would be discouraged due to interest costs so it’s only possible when The Fed is trying to gin up the economy by keeping interest rates near zero. The companies never even pay off the debt with any of their own money, they just keep borrowing more to only pay the interest, and The Fed continues to facilitate the Ponzi scheme by purchasing the corporate debt used to buy the stock, so-called junk bonds. Stock buybacks, private individuals getting ultra-wealthy simply by exploiting the holes in the financial system, are an example of what gives Capitalism a bad name. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-12_843_stock_buybacks.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-12_843_stock_buybacks.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, stock buybacks no Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Liberty includes profiting from your own actions, but no one likes to be measured against others and come out wanting, especially if the gap continues to grow, so egalitarians react by saying everyone should be equal and stay that way; they demean profit and accumulation of wealth under the guise of altruism. The perverse & resentful Left use “profit” like a curse word. Rather than defend profit motive, consider what it would be like without it? We actually have good examples from the egalitarian countries: the former Soviet Union, North Korea, Zimbabwe, Cambodia, etc. People who didn't benefit from their additional effort, didn't do any. In fact, that slippery-slope becomes doing the least amount as possible, all the way to doing nothing because they're going to receive the same as everyone else, no-matter-what. The only way the nonprofit system works is to replace profit with force, which is why egalitarian systems must be authoritarian. However, the same people who prefer egalitarianism also prefer authoritarianism because it's not just outlawing profit; they want to eliminate any activities or goals that makes them feel inferior. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-10_842_profit_motive.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-10_842_profit_motive.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, profit motive no Tue, 22 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor A modern economy requires people to spend money; in fact, in a flagging economy, saving money is actually a bad thing and borrowing money is a good thing. The way The Fed encourages borrowing is to lower interest rates, so far to the point where there is almost no incentive to keep money in a bank except for the convenience. In times of dire economic slowdown, where the goal is to get people to borrow money but interest rates are already zero, it's obvious negative interest rates are next, meaning money in the bank is decreasing in value; this actively encourages people to spend their money. This is already happening in the Euro zone banks. Saving money for a rainy day is a conscientious axiom; everybody believes it though the majority of Americans don't do it. Saving money for retirement is even more ingrained in the American economic psyche. Negative interest rates will certainly cause anguish & turmoil similar to rising inflation because they are essentially the same thing, and incentivize the same thing: spend now. Young people typically don't have much retirement, nor savings of any kind, so negative interest rates that encourages lenders to lend more at lower interest rates benefits them. Young people are typical the producers, and people with savings are typically not, so if the goal is to encourage production, negative interest rates do that too. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-10_841_negative_interest_rates.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-10_841_negative_interest_rates.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, negative interest rates no Sun, 20 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor When there's a lot of money printing, economists bemoan that it's devaluing the currency, but practically speaking, devaluing the dollar is only important in relation to other currencies; for example, it takes more dollars to buy the euro or the yuan. Ultimately, this means that imports become more expensive, causing Americans to buy less of them; a good thing for American workers. It also means that U.S. made goods are cheaper in foreign markets, which is also a good thing for American workers. In fact, devaluation is such a lucrative trade-off that China manipulates the currency markets to devalue their yuan on purpose, which is supposedly illegal because, of course, every nation would want to do it. However, the U.S. does essentially the same thing by printing money. Apparently, if the past decades are any example, currency devaluation doesn’t cause economic collapse, nor even an overall change in trade. In fact, even with all the devaluation of the dollar, it's still the strongest currency. Many people attribute that to its reserve status, meaning it's the world's currency, but the reality is that all nations are devaluing their currency in some manner or another, sometimes purposefully, so that in comparison, the dollar is still a pretty good deal. None of this makes any difference unless a nation's consumption exceeds its production including trade, and something like virus lockdowns, mass retirements, or a UBI could change that, then currency devaluation turns into inflation. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-08_840_devaluation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-08_840_devaluation.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, devaluation, currency no Fri, 18 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Even though the term “money supply” sounds self-explanatory, there are several iterations of it: M1, M2, M3, etc.; each more esoteric than the last. The simple explanation is that in an age before people understood that the supply of money was endless, and where inflation was seen as the great bugaboo, tying the amount of money to something tangible, like gold or debts, was seen as natural and preventive. Even when the absolute proof perfect that money is imaginary, Bitcoin, came along, people still tried to explain that the value of their coins were somehow tied to the number of computer operations performed to get them, and as those increased then so did the supply of Bitcoins. The reality is that the whole concept of money supply is an illusion to achieve a predetermined limited 3% increase per year. In fact, the entire U.S. monetary system is tied to this anachronism: since borrowing increases the money supply, supposedly The Fed can limit it by increasing interest rates, but that's simply an illusion too, used to mollify economists & investors, and nothing more than a made up rule in a made up game; a minor one at that. Quantitative Easing, purchasing of Treasuries & bad debt, and indirect participation in the Equities Market are the Fed's real power, and those activities show there is an unlimited supply of money. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-08_839_money_supply.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-08_839_money_supply.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, money supply no Wed, 16 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Modern Monetary Theory, or MMT, is not that modern; it was academically proposed by Georg Knapp in 1905 as a contrast to the Gold Standard. There were hints of it before by Adam Smith, John Stewart Mills and even Karl Marx. Economist Randall Wray is a contemporary proponent, and Socialist Presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders, based his proposed economic policies on it. The term “Modern Monetary Theory” was actually coined by Wall Street trader Warren Mosler in the 1970s when he became rich by understanding that money is imaginary. Few other people understood the MMT concept because they could not grasp that money is imaginary; they were taught that money is a bartering convenience so that people don't have to trade chickens, and that it's simply a stand-in for something real; but Knapp argued “money is a creature of law,” which means The State can wish it into existence. Exploiting the fact that money is imaginary leads to the idea that it can be created as needed to fund public policy, and there would be no national debt because government would not need to borrow money, nor collect taxes. The risk of MMT is inflation, which can be held in check as long as production equals consumption. In past practice, most MMT implementations have failed spectacularly, resulting in hyperinflation, but those were all examples where consumption exceeded production, caused war, famine, collectivism, or some other production-limiting catastrophe. The U.S. actually practices MMT via its giantic National Debt, though most economists don't admit it. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-06_838_modern_monetary_theory.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-06_838_modern_monetary_theory.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, MMT, modern monetary theory no Mon, 14 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Let's review what happened to the media: The Left has gotten control of The Media, and they're not letting go. The Media is The Left's most powerful weapon for destroying their opponents. Propaganda works; always has; always will. There's more hoaxes than real news because a lot of people seem to like them. Witch hunting is quite fashionable again, but it never really went out of style. Fox News has actually become the most Fair And Balanced news source. CNN is called the Clown News Network for good reason. RT is how news used to be done, but with a Russian accent. Most people get their news from the basements of YouTubers. The Intellectual Dark Web may not be dark nor intellectual, but the name sure is catchy. The Left-controlled news is irrational because they can't win rationally. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-06_837_news_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-06_837_news_concepts.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, news, media no Sat, 12 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The almost total bias of the MSM is irrational, especially the ridiculous overstatements, unsourced hoaxes, and inane claims of foreign interference in elections. It wasn't like this 20 years ago; what happened? This is a result of the successful strategy of The Left to take over the narrative. It was mostly hidden, a subtle boiling of the frog, because the prevailing ideology was liberty, older people still espoused liberty, laws are based on liberty, and liberty had the inertia, so letting the cat out of the bag too soon would have doomed their goal of making equality paramount over liberty; but then they got royally triggered. The momentum of egalitarianism seemed unstoppable, it's success almost assured with Hillary Clinton running for president, and it was icing on the cake that Donald Trump, a stooge in their eyes, was the nominee against their sure thing. They were arrogantly dismissive, already celebrating & joking, but when Trump won, the joke was on them, the schadenfreude was overwhelming; cognitive dissonance set it, and irrationally ensued. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-06_836_why_is_the_news_irrational.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-06_836_why_is_the_news_irrational.mp3 2:13 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, MSM, schadenfreude no Thu, 10 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor YouTube has made some unlikely people famous: Jordan Peterson, for example; a soft-spoken clinical psychologist who went against the full force of Leftist elitism all by himself, earning him First Chair in the Intellectual Dark Web, a term used by an informal group of pundits who oppose the ideology of The Left: post-modernism, post-structuralism, and political correctness. Its personalities identify as both conservatives and liberals, and is a regular Who's Who of iconoclasts: Eric Weinstein, Sam Harris, Jonathan Haidt, Dave Rubin, Ben Shapiro, Steven Pinker, Carl Benjamin, and even podcaster par excellence, Joe Rogan. These people can definitely debate, or at least foster a reasonable debate, but they are not more notably intelligent nor entertaining than others who think the same way, they were just in the right place at the right time when the term was coined because, in reality, there is no Intellectual Dark Web; it was just a provocative idea of a Lefty magazine article bemoaning the high quality of the arguments raised against egalitarianism, which even normal thinkers can exploit. Whether the web actually exists or not, I'd still like to be part of it... politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-04_835_intellectual_dark_web.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-04_835_intellectual_dark_web.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Intellectual Dark Web, Jordan Peterson no Tue, 08 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Since watching broadcast news is both boring and even uninformative due to the extreme bias, many people have switched to watching news aggregaters on YouTube. The most prominent are journalist Tim Pool, of TimCast, commentator Tarl Warwick, under the name Styxhexenhammer666, and author Scott Adams, as in “Coffee With.” Their audiences are mostly men judging from the thousands of comments under each of their videos, usually at least 2 per day. All three are also Old School liberals, who have an audience of Old School liberals that have no place to go since The Left has gotten so extreme. Their ideology is important because you can trust their judgment to separate the hundreds of news stories they must sift through to determine fact or fiction, and especially identify the hoaxes. None are biased in the way the MSM is; if anything, they all seem apologetic for not taking an editorial stand on most issues, which leaves their reporting feeling wishy-washy, but they're clear on what they think are obvious misstatements and falsehoods. Most of their followers probably only listen to the first couple minutes of each video, enough to get the gist, then form their own conclusions and move on. The amazing thing is how someone with only a cellphone can influence national politics through honesty, work ethic & self-awareness. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-04_834_youtube_political_personalities.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-04_834_youtube_political_personalities.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, youtube personalities no Sun, 06 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor Russia-Today, the Russian government-funded news program, was renamed “RT,” presumably to obscure the Russia connection after all the bad Trump press. It was created in 2005 and broadcasts in 5 languages, English being the most influential, and even has some content local to the regions they operate in. They have had some excellent, intelligent shows, including: Chris Hedges, Larry King, Jesse Ventura, Julian Assange, Ed Schultz, and other high-profile personalities from both political parties; made even more impressive because of the Russia-connection stigma. Curious, I watched some RT on YouTube; first thing I noticed was the big warning tacked onto the bottom of their videos by YouTube, "financed by the Russian government." It was a typical news show interview of a Venezuela-apologist explaining the failure of Venezuela's socialism was mostly due to the U.S. In fact, the guest said most of the problems in South America are intentionally caused by the U.S. The female RT host seemed quite based; she pushed back against the guest's narrative, undermining most of what he said. My impression was that RT is more news-like than any U.S. MSM sources are now. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-02_833_rt.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-02_833_rt.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, RT, Russia Today, news no Fri, 04 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor When Ted Turner created CNN at the dawn of the Cable age, it was a tedious 24-hour loop of the same truncated news stories. However, the genius of its marketing was the idea of monopolizing airports; airports carry the mystique of sophistication & glamour, and CNN's legitimacy was established. Decades ago, it was “the most trusted name in news,” but, oh, how the mighty have fallen. Now CNN is the NewSpeak equivalent of “news,” in that it's anything but news. Everything CNN reports on is so politically biased, it's humorous. It's news anchors are caricatures of reality TV stars. It's reporting is so dystopian that it seems unreal & frightening. CNN is the epitome of so-called fake news; stories that are intentionally misinterpreted, or completely made up. and they often make the news about themselves. The excuse given for CNN's obvious and complete lack of objectivity is that they “get clicks” or “eyeballs” or some other new-tech word for viewership, but CNN had a 25% decline in viewership year-to-year since Trump. What company would keep doing that? Retaining Jeff Zucker as president of CNN makes no sense? They've got to be controlled by an anti-Trump cabal, or possible a foreign interest, or maybe Communists; certainly it's not Capitalists; Capitalists wouldn't be so inept? politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-02_832_cnn.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-07-02_832_cnn.mp3 2:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, CNN, news no Wed, 02 Sep 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor About a decade ago I watched Fox News because they had a perspective that was being ignored by the other news channels, though it was biased and obviously pandered to men; its cutesy female anchors provided some kind of sex fantasy that made its success both frightening & embarrassing. At the time, the age of their average viewer was 68, and now it's 65, with by far the most cable news viewers and almost all of the Top 10 program slots. Back then, “Faux” News was a laughingstock, but all MSM news is faux now, so-much-so that Fox News seems mild in comparison. In fact, a third of Americans think Fox News is the only honest source of news; my white-bread pappy's arguments are Fox News' arguments. The fact that their most successful anchor today, Tucker Carlson, is an old-school liberal; makes their claim of being “fair and balanced” seem appropriate. It was interesting to watch Fox News go from being Never Trump to Trump cheerleading. First they dumped their CEO, then their Trump-hating analysts, and even a couple prominent News anchors. However, there's still Trump-hating going on at Fox as part of their “balanced” claim. The Fox News YouTube channel, which is where most young people get their news, shows clips of Tucker and other bite-size highlights, and has millions of views. Who sits and watches TV anymore? Fox News can be expected to continue its dominance as long at they are the seemingly only voice on The Right. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-30_831_fox_news.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-30_831_fox_news.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, Fox news no Mon, 31 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor The early politics in America had episodes of extreme political vitriol, malevolence & rancor, bordering on hysteria, where the attempted savaging of an individual's reputation was considered just part of the process. Accusing people of the most heinous of things: being murderers, rapists, and witches; was not uncommon. This appetite for destruction has again been normalized. The modern era of witch hunting began with the investigation of all things Clinton, but went supernova during the Trump presidency, facilitated at the highest levels of government: the FBI, CIA, and of course in the U.S. House of Representatives. The clangorous call for heads mostly comes from the MSM, which is now extremely partisan. The once-venerable NYT and WaPo have become little more than smear merchants. Witch hunts start by finding some salacious or offensive conduct from a person's past then treating it as if it happened yesterday. Decades-old allegations should be ignored, even if they're true; nobody is the person they were, and times have changed. The law recognizes that delayed investigations are vindictive; that's why the Statute of Limitations exists. A prime example is the witch hunting of Supreme Court justice Brent Kavanaugh; there were a lot of lawyers on both sides but every single one of them chose to view truth based on their party affiliation. If either person's story had any relevance, doesn't it seem likely that folks would have differing views no matter which party? What makes it so hypocritical is that when the presidential candidate of the other political party was accused of sexual misconduct, including supporting evidence, the same people flat out said, “I believe her but I'm voting for him anyway.” politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-30_830_witch_hunts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-30_830_witch_hunts.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, witch hunt no Sat, 29 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Calling intentionally misleading news stories, “hoaxes,” began during the Trump administration by pundits looking at what was happening to him. It all started before the election and still fell into the realm of dirty but acceptable political maneuvering, but blew up within days of Trump taking office with the Russia Hoax, soon followed by The “fine people” hoax. The hoaxes seemed effective, so an ever-increasing number followed: the Mocking a Disabled Person hoax, Wikieaks hoax, Feeding Fish hoax, Ukrainian hoax, Owes China Billions hoax, Drinking Lysol hoax; innumerable hoaxes based on what Trump did or did not do simply intended on undermining his authority. These hoaxes follow the typical trajectory of a Leftwing news outlet reporting a misleading headline that smears Trump with a story of questionable authenticity, followed by other Trump-hating outlets carrying the story without critical examination. The hoax is soon debunked, but there is no retraction or correction by any of the outlets, and the hoax is still repeated as true by sycophants. Hoaxes appear almost every day, such that their impact has diminished significantly from the early days, and that public trust in the News Media has dipped below 10%. Unfortunately, hoaxes still dominate online search results, severely damaging the credibility of Google, etc. as a source of honest, factual information on political matters, or any matter since now all things are political.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-28_829_hoaxes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-28_829_hoaxes.mp3 2:41 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, hoaxes, Trump no Thu, 27 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Indoctrination is saying something enough times that people internalize it as one of their core beliefs that control how they act. Indoctrination is especially effective on children, and even more so if the information is from an authoritative source. Indoctrination is the most influential method of conditioning a society to a particular message; the message itself is called propaganda; not necessarily a negative thing unless you want a competing message, which is why highly propagandized societies tend towards censorship. Those who control the propaganda control the indoctrination, which means they control society. Propaganda comes from Catholicism and means to propagate their faith. Politics is a secular religion, and uses propaganda is the same way. The political Left knows the value of propaganda, and it fits well in their collectivist, egalitarian view of life. The Right, focusing on individual autonomy, tends to overlook the value of propaganda, even though they were more molded by it than anyone, which puts them at a distinct disadvantage in the control game. The Right doesn't seem to understand that Media, Entertainment & Education are the primary sources of propaganda, and have ceded them to The Left, to their own future demise.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-28_828_propaganda.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-28_828_propaganda.mp3 2:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, propaganda, indoctrination no Tue, 25 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Doesn't it seem odd that over 90 percent of the MSM reporting on president Trump is negative? When did that kind of bias begin? Surely, when I used to watch the news back in the day, what I saw was mostly true? There used to be a mythology about journalists as honest seekers after the truth against the powers-that-be. They exposed corruption and malfeasance, they didn't create it. It could be the news was always a propaganda machine but were able to hide it, or it could be their virtual monopoly was so profitable that they could afford to keep a wall around the newsroom that kept the temptations of the world out? But it's not like that now; the media has become as powerful a political weapon as in any Communist nation of past or present, which might explain what happened... Most likely, the weakness of Capitalism was exploited and all the opinion-making institutions were sold to the highest bidder, and upstarts were financed for the exact purpose of acting as brainwashers to get what their owners wanted through democracy. They control the narrative by first stating their premise, which is the most important part because it keeps their goals always in front, then constantly mischaracterizing their opponents as dishonest, stupid or evil, while propping up or ignoring the malfeasance of their allies. Luckily, if I'm not again being fooled, and if there actually are true facts & stories out there, I can use technology to by-pass MSM indoctrination. Specifically, I watch news aggregators on YouTube who have sensibilities similar to mine, who sort through 100s of stories every day and suss out what's true and what's not. I can spend as little as 10 minutes keeping up with world events. I listen to Scott Adams, Tim Pool, Styxhexenhammer666, and Joe Rogan. All of these guys are Old School Liberals like me who have no other place to go.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-26_827_weaponized_media.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-26_827_weaponized_media.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, media, news, bias no Sun, 23 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy The MSM, entertainment, Tech & education are all totally dominated by one political ideology that's almost completely out of sync with half the population; how can that be? Is there no interest from that half for news & information? The claim is that there is no conspiracy, that the media simply makes money appealing for clicks & ratings with the most outrageous headlines, but then why are the ones that do it, so poorly rated and don't seem to be viable operations without mysterious influxes of money. It can't be about money because there isn't any, and the reporting is too biased to not be collusion; so who controls them? For example, When Newsweek, the famous legitimate news magazine went broke, they were bought up by a so-called “investor,” who turned them into a partisan rag. Certainly they can't be a profitable; who's propping them up? Same with The New York Times, the Washington Post, and the online smear merchants. First on the list of suspicious behind-the-scenes players is China, which has literally trillions of U.S. dollars from unbalanced "Free" Trade. They've put a lot into Treasuries, and bought a lot of prime Real Estate in American Cities, but there's still 100s of billions left-over. If you were a Marxist, and you understood the power of propaganda, and you knew America's institutions, especially the news & media outlets, were for sale to the highest bidder; what would you do? A second possibility is that the portion of the population that is egalitarian-leaning because they would benefit from forced sharing, have combined with those who would benefit from reversing the status quo. Everyone knows that the weakness of Capitalism is that those with the capital set the tone and make the rules, and so the comrades have infiltrated all the areas of propaganda & control through Affirmative Action and sanctimonious brow-beating. Scratch someone who claims "diversity is our strength,” and you'll find a feminist, minority or weirdo with plans to change the world in their image, and they're all working in unorchestrated synchronicity.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-26_826_controlled_media.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-26_826_controlled_media.mp3 3:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, media, bias no Fri, 21 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy There's a lot more things about healthcare to talk about; let's review: Healthcare has been a “r” right since 1986, and seems likely to be a “R” Right in the future. Of course there's a Right to Other People's Labor; you get an attorney don't you? There are very successful examples of Free Market healthcare that work for the Middle Class but it's still more than The Poor can afford. High healthcare costs are the natural result of market distortion, manipulation & collusion, made possible because some people will do anything for their health or wealth. It's not that difficult to cut healthcare costs but the people getting the money won't let you. People who purport to “measure” healthcare can't even agree on what they're measuring. Ranking healthcare through an egalitarian perspective could make Andorra #1. Great Britain has the best healthcare for everybody, and the U.S. has the best healthcare for you. If you don't want vaccinations, you can always just catch the disease to become immune. COVID19 is the first politically-generated virus. Lockdowns are the result of egalitarianism: if everybody can't go outside, nobody can. ou may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-24_825_other_healthcare_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-24_825_other_healthcare_concepts.mp3 2:51 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, healthcare, health care no Wed, 19 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Benjamin Franklin famously said, “those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety.” The Corona virus scare tested Americans on this issue and we failed; at least the half the nation was willing to give up Freedom of Movement, Right to Assemble, Freedom of commerce, and even Freedom of Speech if it conflicted with the State-sponsored narrative; all because they chose life over liberty. It shouldn't even have been a contest: “I only regret that I have but one life to give for my county,” “give me liberty or give me death,” “better to die for freedom than remain a prisoner,” are the sentiments Americans used to aspire to. Life means little if you sacrifice what you're living for, but the only choice given was healthy people had to stay indefinitely confined to ostensibly save the lives of unhealthy people; a measure of how much our liberty is worth in comparison to a slight risk to their life. Human life is definitely not the primary imperative: we send our best to be killed in war for our way of life; we drive even though there is epic lose of life in automobiles; not to mention extreme sports. People try to insist the choice is between life and money but it's definitely life vs. liberty, and there was another choice rather than choosing lockdowns. The liberty solution, the one Sweden adopted, was that people can make the individual decision of what risks to take for themselves and others; and their economy was saved along the way. When the priority is liberty, the details always seem to work themselves out.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-24_824_lockdowns.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-24_824_lockdowns.mp3 2:51 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, lockdown no Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & humor There's lots of respiratory, meaning they affect your breathing, viruses, thousands maybe? The common flu is also a respiratory virus, which is why COVID19 is often compared to the flu, and rightly so regardless of any sanctimonious posturing about life & death you might hear. The various flu strains are estimated to kill about 50K people a year but the actual cause of death is normally listed as pneumonia, or fever. Contrarily, COVID19 is often listed as the cause of death, even when something else was the actual cause. COVID19 is only dangerous to people with compromised breathing, or weakened immune systems, usually the very old. There are no drugs that cure flu, and flu kills children but COVID19 rarely does. There are no cases of a child passing COVID19 to an adult. With a comparison like that, obviously health officials need to examine their priorities. Masks don't prevent people from catching a virus because viruses are way too small. Masks just stop those who are contagious from sneezing on the food at the grocery store. However, masks seem to placate people; makes them think their doing something proactive even if they are ridiculous. Since only retirement-age people are at high risk; another plan would be for younger people to live their lives while those at risk self-quarantine. In fact, several nations, Sweden in particular, did not lockdown, but decided to let the virus spread naturally to obtain herd immunity while protecting their vulnerable, which worked and showed that lockdowns are primarily to facilitate authoritarians’ lust for power & control. politics & humor https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-15_823_covid19.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-08-15_823_covid19.mp3 2:59 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, COVID19, lockdown no Sat, 15 Aug 2020 07:57:31 -0700 politics & philosophy Vaccines rely on the person’s natural immune system, and that’s different from person to person. Different vaccines have varying methods of action; for example, the most famous, polio, has both an active and inert versions. The active works almost exactly like exposure, but inert only gives the recipient immunity and can still be contagious. Europe uses active but the U.S. won’t accept the side effects so uses inert. The alternative to vaccination is to intentionally contract diseases to get immunity, after which you are not contagious. This is a perfectly acceptable strategy if it could be organized properly: go live with your friends in a commune for 3 weeks, get sick, get immune and come back to public life. The only legitimate claim that Anti-vaxxers make is that a tiny fraction of children will respond antithetically to the vaccine. It’s a terrible price to pay but so are many trade-offs in life, and it's a 1 in 10 million chance; less than the danger of taking a bath. In comparison, the death rate from Chicken pox is significantly higher than the death rate from vaccination, and Chicken pox causes Shingles later in life if you are exposed to unvaccinated people. It's the in-between vaccines that most people don't seem to need, like MMR, Measles, Mumps & Rubella, that anti-vaxxers most object to: Measles may be harmless to kids but it's deadly to fetuses; the death rate from Mumps is certainly higher than the death rate from vaccination; and Rubella is a real killer, way, way more than from vaccination.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-22_822_vaccinations.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-22_822_vaccinations.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, vaccination, anti-vaxx no Thu, 13 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy While training as a doctor, I did my Basic Sciences in England, and while there utilized their fully socialized National Health Service, the NHS. In comparison, during my medical training rotations in the United States, I served in The Bronx, East Oakland, and South Miami, three of the most notorious hospitals in the nation. I've also visited over 100 countries, spent a year touring Africa, and I'm an attorney. In my estimation, the British healthcare system is best, not because of the NHS, but because it has both public healthcare and private healthcare options, with preferences among its citizens about evenly split. If a Brit wants free healthcare, there's the NHS, and it's fine but Americans would have to get used to not being such prima donnas. The rest of the population uses U.S.-style, insurance-based private healthcare, with service & capabilities very similar to the U.S. This is where Market Forces play a part: healthcare in the UK is free but utilitarian; no glass & chrome palaces so 40% of their population opts for private healthcare, but because the alternative is free, private healthcare costs are kept low. It’s an effective market choice trade-off that has little to do with quality of care or wait times, those are mostly the same; it's more for status, a benefit British companies can offer significantly cheaper than the U.S. Great Britain has the best of both worlds except that the people who use private healthcare still have to pay for the public one.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-22_821_us_healthcare_vs_great_britain.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-22_821_us_healthcare_vs_great_britain.mp3 2:47 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, healthcare, NHS no Tue, 11 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy There are political agendas in ranking healthcare among nations. Technically, world healthcare rankings don’t even use the same reporting criteria, but the biggest difference is they aggregate everybody’s outcome, not personal outcome. This measurement difference affects the very definition of “healthcare;” rationing by everyone receiving the same care, the egalitarian ideal, to rationing the best care to those who can afford it, which are two very different ways to rank. It's the same continuing battle between sanctimony and conscientiousness, so with that in mind, it's not difficult to believe that according to the discredited World Health Organization, the WHO, France has the best healthcare in the world; followed by Italy, San Marino, and of course, Andorro. The United States is ranked 37th, which is better than Slovenia but not as good as Costa Rica. These rankings result because, according to the WHO, the goals of healthcare have components of quality, equity, responsiveness & fairness. The word “quality” is insidiously misleading because it means the health of everybody, not the kind of care you personally could expect to get in a hospital. Equity means everybody receives the same healthcare, no buying up. Responsiveness is a subjective measure of what people expect rather than any actual measurements. Fairness is whatever anybody wants it to mean. I suggest anybody in the WHO, or believes in the goals of the WHO, go to Andorro the next time they have a brain embolism.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-20_820_ranking_healthcare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-20_820_ranking_healthcare.mp3 2:47 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, healthcare, ranking no Sun, 09 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Demagoguery is perhaps the most exploitable aspect of healthcare because it's literally a life-or-death situation. This, of course, leads to political manipulation based on ideological grounds, specifically, the ubiquitous liberty vs. egalitarian battle. One of the egalitarians most effective tactics is to “measure” healthcare, which sounds reasonable, except they pick the metrics, and there's a blatant lack of any measure of actual quality; like the level of training of doctors, the comfort of the patients, or even the availability of modern technology, treatments & equipment. Instead their intention is to discredit meritocracy in favor of subjective social platitudes like empathy & equality, without knowing how many knee replacements & heart stints have been performed, or how quickly & professionally. Life expectancy doesn’t mean anything: America has strict recording methods about infant mortality, and there's lots of obesity. In America, you have the liberty to destroy your health. America’s healthcare system is excellent, and there’s plenty of it; the problem is the cost. Many people are one injury away from bankruptcy. This situation particularly affects the Middle Class, people who have too much to get healthcare for free because they have something to lose. Unfortunately, they're only about 20% of the population, so in a democracy, they don't have enough voting power versus the healthcare industrial complex. Still, every measurable real thing about America's healthcare is best, if you’re rich, or if you're poor.     politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-20_819_measuring_healthcare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-20_819_measuring_healthcare.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, healthcare, measurement no Fri, 07 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Healthcare plays on people’s fear, vanity & self-righteousness; that's a deadly combination that politics can’t fix, and a formula for upward spiraling costs. Only adversarial relationships can contain costs so the goal is for healthcare to remain as Market Forces driven as possible, with both private and public options, while recognizing that it’s a natural monopoly, and that business goals are not the same as societal goals. With that in mind, here’s a short list of things that could be done to lower healthcare costs: The first step has got to be to force health providers to publicly list their prices. For example, post all-inclusive prices for surgery. Some facilities have been doing this for decades and it's been spectacularly successful, but runs into the insurance manipulation juggernaut. Eliminating State-by-State licensing would facilitate franchising and doctor availability. Start physician training right out of high school like other nations, no prerequisite undergraduate degree, which lowers the cost of education. No cap on medical Residencies. Currently, many aspiring doctors with M.D.s cannot practice because they can’t get a Residency. But do place caps on Medical Liability Awards; the States with caps have lower costs. Let Medicare negotiate prices. Right now, by law, they can't. And make Medicare an option for ACA insurance at its cost. Don’t let drug companies advertise. Only the U.S. and New Zealand allow drug advertising, which is 90% of the money the pharmaceutical companies spend; only a tiny fraction goes to R&D and manufacturing. And no public funding of “alternative” medicine, or any other quackery like chiropractic or acupuncture, which has been completely debunked using the same kind of scientific studies used to verify real medicine. Finding solutions to the high cost of healthcare are easier than identifying the problems.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-18_818_cutting_healthcare_costs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-18_818_cutting_healthcare_costs.mp3 3:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, healthcare, costs no Wed, 05 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy There are a variety of reasons healthcare in the U.S. is so expensive; most people know that insurance is a poor way to handle healthcare costs because insurance is the practice of everyone pooling their money for rare, expensive events, but healthcare is not rare, everyone needs it regularly; therefore the insurance strategy is the main culprit; but there are other, less known and more insidious reasons for the high cost of American healthcare: First, the 1973 HMO Act allowed the development of for-profit healthcare organizations; before that they were nonprofit, not Capitalism-based. The profit motive of hospitals adds layers of investors and managers that simply aren’t needed. Secondly, the reason Emergency Room costs are so outrageous is that since hospitals are reimbursed by the government for healthcare to non-paying patients, they make the prices as high as they can. Insurance companies have negotiated away those high costs so only the government and people without insurance pay the super-high prices. Obamacare exacerbated this exploitation. Plus, there’s perverse incentives for hospitals to charge an exorbitant amount to cash-buyers but accept a reasonable amount from insurance companies because of kickbacks to mysterious insurance brokers that work behind the scenes to manipulate prices. Another huge component of healthcare cost is psychological; first there's the democracy component: as long as a considerable voting block gets free healthcare, they don't much care if the other people have to pay high prices. And who wants “choice” in healthcare? Everyone wants the very best; and because there’s a status-prestige aspect to healthcare, it becomes a fashion statement: “My Dr. went to Yale,” “My clinic has escalators,” “My nurse held my hand the whole time.” American healthcare offers the very best in glass & chrome medical palaces because the cost of the facilities are presumably indicative of the care. In these circumstances, why would anybody be surprised American healthcare is the most expensive on the planet?   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-18_817_high_healthcare_costs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-18_817_high_healthcare_costs.mp3 3:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, healthcare, costs no Mon, 03 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Healthcare consumers can be divided into three groups: those who can afford it and don't really care how it's provided as long as they get the best; then there's those who can't afford it and want the government to provide it as long as they get the best; and lastly, Free Market types who would be willing to shop around. These are mostly self-employed people not covered by an insurance plan because they are too expensive. Free Markets are typified by price transparency, meaning you know up front what you're going to pay with no unexpected charges. Because of the nature of your health, that requirement best applies to treatments with a predictable process, like surgery, that are also traditionally very expensive, so the savings are worth the inconvenience of traveling someplace else. The Free Market Medical Association is a prime example of how this works in practice with their multi-decade record of low prices with excellent outcomes. They don't take insurance, not that they wouldn’t but insurers won’t take them. Insurance is one big pricing scam, as evidenced by how the stocks of those companies soared upon passage of Obamacare then cratered upon the issuance of the Executive Order from the White House for Price Transparency. The transparency requirement is the first step in unwinding the too-cozy relationship between government and their crony healthcare industry. State regulations that prevent Free Market healthcare also have to be overcome for it to gain wide acceptance, so you wouldn't have go to Oklahoma City to get treatment.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-16_816_free_market_healthcare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-16_816_free_market_healthcare.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, healthcare, free market no Sat, 01 Aug 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy One of the repeated complaints against socialized healthcare is that people don't have the right to other people's labor; that patients can't force doctors to treat them. That's an easy argument to counter because as everyone knows, defendants have the right of an attorney in a criminal trial, and if they cannot afford it, the court will provide one. That's essentially a right to someone else's labor though the attorney does get paid by the government. Similarly, if someone shows up injured at an Emergency Room, the doctors there must serve them, that's the law too; and those doctors get paid, as does the hospital, even if the patient is indigent. However, a doctor is not required to help an injured person at an accident or any other time. The conflating of providing healthcare and “forced labor” is a specious one because it's only in hospital Emergency Rooms. Hospitals that do not want to provide that labor simply don't have Emergency Rooms. The argument isn't rather doctors are forced to work or have to work for free, but whether institutions must provide healthcare in proscribed situations. Probably, the people who don't like socialized healthcare know all of this but “no one has the right to other people's labor” sounds reasonable even though it's demonstrably untrue; ask any schoolteacher.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-16_815_right_to_other_peoples_labor.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-16_815_right_to_other_peoples_labor.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, healthcare no Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy The battle over healthcare centers on whether it's a Right or a voluntary market transaction? Some people try to make the distinction that since it's not enumerated in The Constitution, it's not a Right, but that's an unsophisticated assumption; there are many Rights not explicitly spelled out in The Constitution but have been “constructed” by the Supreme Court, and many more Rights that are instantiated through legislation, and enforced by the law; for example, primary education of children is a “right.” The reality is healthcare became a right in 1986 with the EMTALA Act: if someone comes to the Emergency Room and requests care, the hospital is forced to provide it, that's the very definition of a positive right. Since healthcare is a Right, it should be paid for out of the General Fund, like the military and judicial system, that all taxpayers pay for, not like Medicare which only Working-People pay for. Also, since heathcare's a positive Right, it's de facto socialism and the principle of "most good to the most people" applies. It all boils down to that government should be paying for healthcare, and everyone should be able to get it, and this concept doesn't preclude Free Market healthcare for those who want special treatment. Conservative Americans are not fans of positive Rights because of the opportunity for abuse and the lack of responsibility, but healthcare has already climbed onto the list of Rights, and should be treated accordingly.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-14_814_is_healthcare_a_right.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-14_814_is_healthcare_a_right.mp3 2:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, healthcare, health care, right no Tue, 28 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Let's review some of the other Rights people are always talking about: Constitutional Rights are paramount though lots of people have other ideas what's more important. The Bill of Rights was more than an afterthought but less than Constitutional original text. Interpreting The Constitution is more democracy than it is judicial. Amending The Constitution is not really considered a possibility anymore. Constructed Rights are what happens when the political process breaks down. Egalitarianism is not in The Constitution but most people think it is. Human Rights are imaginary because there's no one to enforce them. People invoke Natural Rights when they claim morals, ethics & values supersede The Law. Capitalism provides cover to suppress personal Rights. The rights of minors hinge on arbitrary age limits because there's no better way. Parental Rights are at play in the war between liberty vs. egalitarianism. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-14_813_other_rights_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-14_813_other_rights_concepts.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, rights, constitution no Sun, 26 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy The Rights of parents are not specifically mentioned in The Constitution; instead relying on the Parental Rights Doctrine, giving parents the right to raise their children without government interference, unless proven unfit. It's a history of legal precedent where parents were assumed to be the best caretakers for their children, and had a fundamental right to direct their upbringing and education. Parental Rights are also accompanied by responsibly, specifically parents are legally responsible for their children's actions, civil and criminal. Parental Rights held sway up until this century when the Supreme Court began allowing States, and even individual judges, to apply their own rules over children. This has degenerated into America having a patchwork of Parental Rights States: 11 with an actual statute protecting Parental Rights, and 19 requiring “strict scrutiny” when those Rights are threatened in court; leaving a lot of States whose egalitarian impulses could supersede, and even abolish, Parental Rights. The traditional family unit definitely requires responsible behavior on everybody's part, but unfortunately, there is no longer anywhere where these skills are taught, since feminist ideology has removed the burden from women so that in many instances The State is forced to step in to be the parent, further eroding Parental Rights.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-14_812_parental_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-14_812_parental_rights.mp3 2:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, parental rights no Fri, 24 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Children don't have a full set of Constitutionally guaranteed Rights like adults because they aren't considered mature enough to make informed decisions. Children's Rights have primarily been determined by a series of Supreme Court Cases and precedence from English Common law, and are fraught with arbitrary limitations: why 16 to get a Driver's license, 18 to vote, but 21 to smoke or drink alcohol, yet a 16-year old can be tried as an adult. Yet, medically, a human's frontal cortex, the part of the brain that makes rational decisions, isn't fully formed until age 25-32. The State can take over responsibility for a minor, called “parens patriae,” to protect their health, safety, and welfare; under the guise of acting in their best interests. And schools have another level of authority, called “in loco parentis” that can curtail a child's civil liberties. Of course, there's the parents who can rule with an iron fist under the Parental Rights Doctrine. This all proves that liberty must be taught, along with responsibility for your actions and respect for other people's liberty, because babies aren't born with those understandings. Presumably, when they do, they become “adults” but, actually, most adults haven't learned those concepts either, so obviously, the concept of a “minor” is rather muddled, and therefore the rights of minors are too.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-12_811_rights_of_minors.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-12_811_rights_of_minors.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, minors, rights no Wed, 22 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Modern technology combined with authoritarian impulses and lack of regulations has dealt more of a blow to personal rights than any government agency because just about every Right enumerated in The Constitution can be trampled by saying a business is “private;” any amount of bias, censorship & discrimination is acceptable; made possible by the intrigues of Capitalism. Capitalism is not the cause but it is the mechanism of subverting rights because it allows bad-actors to gain ownership of public functions: like news, higher education, entertainment & technology. Foreign Nations, whose interests are contrary to America's, have gained control of these highly influential, propaganda producing conduits of information & opinion, and in combination with sympathetic ideological partisans in America, pose an existential threat to our tenuously held rights. People assume Capitalism acts as it does to “make more money,” but money isn't the cause of business interfering with our rights: credit card companies aren’t denying payment processing because they’ll make more money; Sporting goods stores didn’t stop selling guns to 18-year olds because they’ll make more money; Google isn’t changing search results to make more money; Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc. don’t deplatform people to make more money. These are cases where Capitalism isn't used to make money, but instead to suppress rights.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-12_810_capitalism_vs_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-12_810_capitalism_vs_rights.mp3 2:42 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, capitalism, rights no Mon, 20 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Natural Rights come from the concept of Natural Law, which was part of Greek philosophy. Natural Law advocates believe morals are encoded in people's DNA, or possibly endowed by a divine presence. To most people, if it's found in the Bible, it's natural. Basically, Natural Rights are the justification to insist morals, which are subjective, can override the traditional role of legal jurisprudence. Secular Natural Rights advocates use the word “inalienable” because of the unquestionable authority it implies, and they include ethics & values in their list of Natural Rights. One of their favorites is “pursuit of happiness,” which has quasi-legitimacy due to its fame, though it isn't even part of U.S. legal canon. There's no specific number of Natural Rights because ethics & values are as subjective as morals, and vary per culture & tradition. This makes it difficult to enforce Natural Rights around the world but often throughout history, a powerful country will feel it's their moral and ethical duty to do so; usually as justification to expand an empire or make a profit. Interestingly, nowhere do Natural Rights guarantee food, shelter, clothing or security? That would be charity, which isn't a Natural Right, apparently because it costs money.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-10_809_natural_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-10_809_natural_rights.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, natural rights no Sat, 18 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy There are the rights you have in the law, mostly the right to be left alone, but that's not enough for a lot of people who insist there is a plethora of imaginary rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 30 rights imagined by the United Nations in 1948, is primarily egalitarian, without a hint personal responsibility; no people reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of their own actions. Of course, the first Human Right is “all human beings are free and equal,” because equality at the expense of merit is the touchstone of Leftist ideology. The next Human Right focuses on discrimination, all types imaginable, from the pov of those who claim to be discriminated against. Next are a bevy of Rights that were probably taken from the U.S. Constitution: life, property, freedom from slavery, no torture, privacy, religion, speech, expression, assembly, democracy, education, marriage & progeny, equality before the law, innocent until proven guilty, etc. Predictably, their “Freedom of Movement” is Open Borders. Welfare also figures prominently in these Rights, with multiculturalism & extended holidays specifically mentioned. How the United Nations intends to enforce these Rights is not made clear since there is no mention of an army or police force of any kind, yet Right number 30 expressly states that these imaginary Rights cannot be taken away, so who's going to stop that from happening?   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-10_808_imaginary_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-10_808_imaginary_rights.mp3 2:47 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, human rights, imaginary rights no Thu, 16 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy A positive right obliges action; for example, the obligation to pay taxes, or be forcibly inducted into the military. Luckily, there are very few of them because they are the exact opposite of liberty, which as counter-intuitive as the term seems, confers negative rights, meaning you are NOT to be subjected to the wants or needs of others, especially government. A person cannot be subjected to a requirement, another person or group without direct consent or mutual contract. Negative rights are fundamental to a liberty society but, apparently, are not taught in schools: Columbia Law School surveyed random people whether they thought the famous phrase, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” was part of The Constitution, and two-thirds of those polled thought it was! How ironic & saddening that the basis of Marxism, the foundation of Communism, which is a doctrine of positive rights, is confused for liberty. In fact, it's possible that liberty; making decisions for yourself and reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of your actions, is less understood than egalitarianism, which considers meritocracy as selfishness, and insists you are your brother's keeper. This misconception actually undermines the legitimacy of The Constitution in a democracy since the majority of people are not in sync with its main premise.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-10_807_whats_not_in_the_constitution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-10_807_whats_not_in_the_constitution.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, constitution, rights no Tue, 14 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy There are a lot of dilettante non-lawyers who consider themselves Constitutional scholars, and repeatedly express their idea that Rights not explicitly enumerated in The Constitution don't exist; like the right to healthcare. Obviously, these people are unaware of the concept of Constructed Rights; Frankenstein-like rights cobbled together from other Rights, real or imagined, by various Supreme Court decisions over the centuries. Constructed Rights are just as precedence-setting as the real thing. Examples of Constructed Rights are Right to Privacy, Freedom of Movement, Right to Vote, Innocent Until Proven Guilty, and even Freedom of Expression, which laypeople assume are in The Constitution but aren't. The practical fact is, most new, far-reaching Rights came from various Supreme Courts under the guise of studious deduction of what The Constitution intended, but since Supreme Court justices are appointed by partisan presidents, and stay on The Bench for life; these new Rights are actually more political, moral, or ethical, than judicial. The ideology of the majority of judges does more to determine the direction of America than any legislative process based on democracy. Adding new Rights is usually decried as “judicial activism,” but with the amendment process so burdened with political gridlock, it seems the only method of keeping The Constitution up with the times is through kritarchy, governance by judges.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-10_806_constructed_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-10_806_constructed_rights.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, constitution, rights, constructed no Sun, 12 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Looking past the aura of divine creation, and the awe just saying “Constitution” brings to an audience, except for a few flashes of poetry and brilliant insight, mostly the document is lost in a sea of mediocrity. A lot of the writing is inapplicable, confusing, impenetrable, ambiguous, contextual, and in many cases, ignored. The vast majority of people can't list more than one or two of its guarantees, nor what they mean. The Constitution is in need of serious updating, but the country has become so diverse, so divided, so chock-full of opposing viewpoints, that the complex process of changing The Constitution is now practically impossible, and nobody really thinks that amending The Constitution is even a possibility anymore. It's not surprising that the last Amendment added was to raise Congress members' pay. In fact, with the dramatic rise of egalitarian sentiment, the very foundation of The Constitution is under attack and its legitimacy is in question. It was ratified without participation by most of the members of society, specifically women, minorities and the poor; so the very concept of liberty is up for debate, and no amount of adjustment is going to solve that. Some on The Left are even calling for abandoning The Constitution. That seems unlikely, but things that do not change, eventually become antiquated & inconsequential.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-10_805_amending_the_constitution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-10_805_amending_the_constitution.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, constitution, amending no Fri, 10 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy   Life & law goes on: when a new situation arises, or even a new variation on an old situation, The Constitution is often looked to for guidance. It's at this point that the various interpretations come into play. There's no one right way to interpret The Constitution, and judges often don't always stick to only one. Outside of legal circles, the popularly-known ways of interpreting The Constitution are “plain language,” “conservative,” and “original intent.” Plain language interprets nothing. If there’s no mention of privacy then there is no Right to it. Another example: if there's no comma after “militia” in the 2nd Amendment, then there is no Right for a private citizen to bear arms; maybe it only means the National Guard? Or maybe people have to belong to a militia to own a gun? Luckily, SCOTUS followed the plain language, included the comma, and interpreted the 2nd Amendment so individuals can own guns. Conservative interpretation means adhering to past precedence, the more there is, the stronger it is, and new judgments can only overturn precedence under extreme scrutiny, like Dread Scott was overturned to reject slavery. Roe v. Wade, the abortion ruling, is highly controversial, the most fought over ruling in a century, but because of all the past precedence, it's highly unlikely it will ever be overturned. SCOTUS would have to become much less conservative. Mindreading is in the purview of the original intentists, and thankfully so, because otherwise several Rights would not exist. For example: Right of Privacy, and Freedom of Association were determined by SCOTUS to be the intention in the The Constitution, even though they are not actually written there. Predicting the past from the future has gone out of fashion, but with the current impossibility of amending The Constitution, it will probably come back.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-08_804_ex_les_of_constitutional_interpretation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-08_804_ex_les_of_constitutional_interpretation.mp3 2:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, constitution, conservative, plain language, original intent no Wed, 08 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy Of course, The Framers of The Constitution could not predict the future so they included an amendment process, but they probably didn't envision that what seems clear and unambiguous to some, would be so differently interpreted by others. Such disputes go to the Supreme Court to decide; however, even in the Supreme Court, interpretations among the nine justices often conflict, especially among those with opposing ideologies: the libertyists vs. the egalitarians. Several interpretative strategies have emerged to resolve such issues, scholastically known as: Originalism, Modernism, Literalism & Democratic. Original Intent proponents think the best way to interpret The Constitution is to determine what the Framers intended. They look to other sources, including the contemporary writings of the framers, newspaper articles, etc. Of course, Originalists consider the original intent to be the most pure way, usually finding a quote somewhere at sometime from a Framer to support their position. Historical Literalists ignore the contemporary writings of the Framers; they contend that only way to interpret the Constitution is a literal reading of the words, with an expert knowledge in their 18th century meaning. Conversely, A Contemporary Literalist has no interest in the historical meaning of the words but relies solely on the modern definitions. The opposing method of interpretation, Modernism, looks at the Constitution as if it were ratified today with the morals and beliefs of current times. Modernists think The Constitution is deliberately vague, expressly to permit modern interpretations to override older ones: this is also known as the “Living Constitution.” concept. The Democratic interpretationists claim that The Constitution is not designed to be a set of specific principles and guidelines, but simply a basic skeleton on which contemporary ideas could be molded onto. This is where the concept of “activist judges” originates; Elites who put their own, or the majority of the population's, morals & values above those of the Framers; a tyranny of the majority approach that egalitarians must resort to if they are going to overcome the frustration of their ideals that adhering to a liberty-based Constitution imposes.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-08_803_interpreting_the_constitution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-08_803_interpreting_the_constitution.mp3 3:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, constitution, literalism, original intent, modernism no Mon, 06 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy At their essence, people are violent, and they would kill each other if they thought they could get away with it; The Constitution is mostly an agreement to prevent that from happening, but it also contains some aspirational concepts. It says in the Preample,”establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity;” but those goals aren't really clarified in the actual Articles that were originally ratified. Those details were instead explained in the first 10 amendments to The Constitution, called the Bill of Rights, which didn't come along until 2 years later. Without the Bill of Rights, the original Articles don’t say much, mostly about the bureaucracy of government, with little to do with the people The Constitution was imagined for. The Articles outlined how Senators were selected, since changed; how the census was counted, since changed; and Habeas Corpus, the right of charges against you to be reviewed by a judge, which has also since changed. They had to be wishy-washy like that to be acceptable at the time to the finicky States. Jefferson & Madison's intention was to get The Constitution adopted then add the meat in the amendments, specifically the Bill of Rights; in fact, they promised them behind the scenes. The Bill of Rights is where you get your Freedom of Speech, your protection from government search & seizure, your protection in court, and your gun ownership. Since then, many more Amendments have been added but the the Bill of Rights is what most people think of as The Constitution.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-06_802_bill_of_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-06_802_bill_of_rights.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, constitution, rights, bill of rights no Sat, 04 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 politics & philosophy   Are Civics even part of the high school curriculum anymore? There's now an entire political party that doesn't seem to understand Constitutional Rights; particularly liberty, Free Speech, and gun ownership. They somehow think these Rights are in play; that a local or State government can place restrictions or simply vote them away? Safety is usually the given reason: limiting Rights will save lives or curb "hate speech,” but the reality is that authoritarians & cowards threaten Rights for their own selfish reasons. Unfortunately, the Corona virus Lockdowns showed that sanctimony is a powerful weapon, and how easily the sheep will fall into line, abandoning their Rights for the imaginary protection of face-masks. Authoritarian governors & mayors actually thought they could extend draconian “safety” measures indefinitely in their attempt to assume full Nanny State control, but that's not how it works: Constitutional Rights are paramount; there is no other secondary concern that takes precedence, at least not in the long run. Eventually, any curtailment of Constitutional Rights will end up in The Courts, and as long as those are conservative justices, your Rights will be restored. It's unfortunate that the elected officials who have abused Constitutional Rights aren't chastised or penalized in some way, but that's one of the weaknesses of democracy: Interest groups, even foreign nations scheming against the U.S., will push as hard as they can against your Constitutional Rights because personal autonomy is often in the way of erstwhile dictatorships.   politics & philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-06_801_constitutional_rights_are_paramount.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2020-06-06_801_constitutional_rights_are_paramount.mp3 3:03 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash humor, politics, constitution, rights no Thu, 02 Jul 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It's fair to say that a lot more is going to be said about Climate Change in the future; let's review: Ecopiety is the new world religion. The politics of Climate Change are the result of generations of eco-indoctrination. Getting rich seems the likely motivation of Climate Alarmists. Climate Scientists are the new priesthood. The list of Climatic Change skeptics is more impressive than Climate Change itself. The cost of Climate Change doesn’t justify doing much about it. Gen IV nuclear seems an easy solution for Climate Change but we won't know if we don't try. Predicting the climate will change is embarrassingly easy. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-23_800_climate_change_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-23_800_climate_change_concepts.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash climate change, politics, humor no Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's assume something actually can and should be done about the changing climate, a big “if” that alone sets off alarm bells in any scientific endeavor, we need to try and predict the results of a warming climate and possible ameliorating responses. China, who has a problem right now, changed to electric motorcycles in under a decade, and they’ve got nukes going up all over the place, but all the proposed solutions in The West make it seem more likely that Globalists see Climate Change as a way to leverage into power: Open Borders, international wealth redistribution, population reduction, upending the status quo; the traditional Marxist agenda. Ulterior motives aside, the likely Climate Change scenario involves preventing mass immigration from Mexico, and encouraging mass migration within the U.S., and probably emigration to Canada. The gun culture will ensure that violence won't spread, and Martial Law plus the National Guard will keep order in threatened enclaves. The entire political landscape will change because the voting blocks will be the migrants versus the existing population, so leaders will arise that reflect that situation. The discussion needs to be give-n-take, otherwise the skeptics won't be reassured because the religious zeal and self-assuredness of the other side is the opposite of convincing. Ultimately, like all complex systems, Climate Change is beyond prediction, so a reactive wait-and-see approach is superior to Marxist agenda-prone proactive bullying.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-23_799_climate_change_predictions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-23_799_climate_change_predictions.mp3 2:55 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash climate change predictions, humor, politics no Sun, 28 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Though sun & wind get all the good press, nuclear energy can replace fossil fuels for our energy needs; not just now but far into the future. Nuclear is already in wide use: Europe has the most reactors, almost 200, followed by Asia with almost 150, and the U.S. holding steady at about 120 because fear has overwhelmed fact. First generation nuclear reactors were used to make atomic bombs but several types of second-generation reactors are what's being used now; technology that's half a century old. Third generation were supposed to be small, disposable reactors that never materialized; but Gen IV nuclear technology can actually solve the world's Climate Change energy controversy. There are several kinds of Gen IV reactors, with Sodium-cooled-fast ready for commercial use, but the others are just waiting for customers. The advantages Gen IV reactors have over their predecessors are: they create 100–300 times more energy yield from the same amount of nuclear fuel; can use a broader range of fuels, including the ability to consume existing nuclear waste, and any remaining waste is only radioactive for a few centuries instead of millennia; and, of course, they're safer. As archaic as it seems, nuclear reactors still make electricity by boiling water to turn an old-fashioned generator, but electricity is the future, no one disputes that. Nuclear is not inherently expensive nor big, that’s artificial; inexpensive reactors are put into submarines and spacecraft. Nuclear is the fastest, cheapest, most efficient, most eco-friendly way to replace fossil fuels. It's politics that makes it expensive and slow, which ends up making people skeptical of the whole alarmist argument, but as soon as nuclear energy is finally on the table, consider solving Climate Change a done deal.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-23_798_the_energy_solution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-23_798_the_energy_solution.mp3 3:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Nuclear energy, Gen 4, humor, politics no Fri, 26 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy A recent government report came out projecting how Climate Change will negatively impact the U.S. GDP: 10.5% by 2100. It's humorous when people make 10-year predictions, but 80 years is insulting, especially when they’re so obviously politically motivated. Climate Alarmists generated sensational doomsday headlines with that data but without any context; which is that number is inconsequential. In comparison, normal GDP growth would be over 700%, and Climate Change would only reduce it to 600%, which is still huge. Even on a global scale, the effects of Climate Change will supposedly limit the world economic growth rate to 2%. That means, even with Climate Change, the world economy will be increasing from $90 trillion to $360 trillion. If instead we tried to combat Climate Change, regulations and other related “fixes” would have a much bigger negative impact on GDP; throttling the world economy for only an estimated 1% reduction in Climate Change. These kinds of wild projected numbers, and the number of years over which they are predicted, is worse than ridiculous, they're dishonest. How is it math is at the mercy of democracy; it should be the other way around.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-22_797_cost_of_climate_change.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-22_797_cost_of_climate_change.mp3 2:43 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash climate change, GDP, politics, humor no Wed, 24 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Though Wikipedia calls it; “list of scientists who disagree with the scientific consensus on global warming,” “Denier” is a term in common usage, and there's no reason not to adopt it. Let's highlight some of the famous Climate Deniers” Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study; Fellow of the Royal Society. Ivar Giaever, Norwegian–American physicist and 1973 Nobel laureate in physics. Judith Curry, professor and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences. Nils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics Department at Stockholm University, former chairman of the Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution. Craig Loehle, ecologist and chief scientist at the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement. Joseph D'Aleo, past Chairman American Meteorological Society's Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecasting, former Professor of Meteorology. Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research, and retired director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre. Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute. Patrick Moore, former president of Greenpeace Canada. Freeman Dyson! Ivar Giaever! Judith Curry! Wow, I think I want to be on the Climate Denier team.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-22_796_who_are_the_climate_deniers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-22_796_who_are_the_climate_deniers.mp3 3:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash climate denier, climate science, humor, politics no Mon, 22 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy What is a Climate Scientist, and why is it that only Climate Scientists, celebrities, and Democrats can understand climate science? For example, if anyone dares question the dire predictions of Climate Scientists, or shows any amount of skepticism, they are accused of being a science denier, and if they are a scientist themselves, even a Nobel Laureate in Physics, they don't know what they're talking about because they aren't Climate Scientists. Apparently, the only way you can prevent climate change is to give supervisory power to a worldwide organization of official Climate Scientists that know what's best for everyone. To make it even more ironic; John Cook, the person who runs the Skeptical Science website which is often cited by Alarmists to defame climate skeptics is not a Climate Scientist; in fact, he’s not a real scientist at all, a “doctor of Cognitive Science,” more of a science hanger-on. Even his famed “97% of Climate Scientists Agree” article, the basis of the so-called scientific consensus on Climate Science, is unscientific; many of the authors of the papers he reported as supporting the Climate Change narrative have vociferously denied that was their conclusion. Plus, there’s even more dissenting papers by Climate Scientists he didn’t bother to include. So if the real Climate Scientists are in disagreement with a non-Climate Scientist who’s dilettante word is taken over their expertise, people can be forgiven if they suspect the whole thing is a fraud.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-22_795_climate_scientists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-22_795_climate_scientists.mp3 3:09 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash climate scientist, climate change, humor, politics no Sat, 20 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy For all the political reasons to promote Climate Change, the question is why scientists go along? Real climate data has been misinterpreted, re-adjusted, or excused as erroneous when it didn’t support the dire predictions. First, they renamed the narrative “Climate Change” from “Global Warming” because per satellite data, there hasn't been any temperature increase in almost two decades. When that data was presented in congress, shortly thereafter it gained a “hockey-stick” jump upward; and another prominent study that also confirmed no change was pressured into collapsing their predicted temperature range to only include the statistically implausible worst case upper-bound. Both of these obviously coerced so-called “adjustments” were laughably defended by mendacious Climate-mavens whose pants were on fire. Additionally, the whole Medieval Warming Period has been conveniently forgotten when discussing the history of Global Warming. To answer why these travesties of science have occurred, as usual, refer back to the old adage, follow the money. There's a lot of cash in the Climate Alarmist business, and a lot more coming. It’s estimated $150 billion was spent during Obama’s tenure, and another $10 billion a year in tax subsidies for wind & solar. Global expenditures for crying Climate Change Wolf are approaching half a trillion dollars, but the future is where the big payoff is because the number they want spent is $5 trillion. That would make 5 million millionaires, which pretty much admits every Climate Alarmist who ever made a peep into The 1%.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-21_794_climate_change_motives.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-21_794_climate_change_motives.mp3 3:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash climate change, politics, humor no Thu, 18 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There's a whole new voting block coming up that's been seeped in Climate demagoguery at ever-increasing levels. Three generations ago, it started out as conservation, the laudable goal of husbanding the world's wildness & resources; I was convinced as a child because that's how indoctrination works but the lesson was innocuous enough, and promised to enhance our way of life, not threaten it. Unfortunately, conservation was used as a Trojan Horse for environmentalism, which is more Marxism than science. In combination with the self-righteous appeals for baby animals, there’s the fear-mongering: nothing scares children more than predictions that the world’s going to end, and it's their fault. Kids haven’t yet gained the capacity for perspective; their nightmares tonight are about the cataclysm tomorrow. Jingoistic politicians exploit this naivete in a criminal way as they try to outgreen each other: for example, there's the Maoistic Green Leap Forward, whose representatives claim we’re a dozen years away from complete Climate annihilation. Poppycock! First, there's a lot of fraudulent science going on behind the whole Global Warming narrative with smoking-gun level rebuttals; it doesn't make any difference what percentage of people think it's true because science isn't subject to democracy. Secondly, the belief in Climate Change dogma wouldn’t split along Party lines; if half the people can't see an elephant in the room, the people who do are hysterical; and thirdly, the whole thing wouldn’t be powered by a Cult of Climate Change used to insist that we must give up our liberty and take leadership from the Elites or we’re all going to die.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-21_793_climate_change_politics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-21_793_climate_change_politics.mp3 3:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash climate change, environmentalism, humor, politics no Tue, 16 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Religion rests on the sense of superiority that comes with piety. Environmentalism as a whole, and Climate Change specifically, are similarly soaking in self-congratulations & piety, so-much-so that ecopiety has become the most universal religion on the planet; a Green imperative rather than a mystical one. Environmentalism offers both ethics and spirituality, establishing new sensibilities of virtue and sin at a personal level. It's adherents engage in tiny voluntary acts like recycling, bicycles, and self-conscientiously trying to offset their imaginary carbon footprint. They don't use plastic bags to carry food out of the grocery store, and make a point of telling waitresses not not include a straw in their water. All this pretend flagellation makes them feel like they're doing something monumental and important: saving the planet. The hypocrisy is that ecopietists consider themselves saved; their personal sacrifices let them off the hook of true changes that would actually make a difference: like living on a farm, and giving up modernity. Of course, their self-righteousness goes further still; personal ecopiety deeds aren't enough environmental virtue, they must also unilaterally impose their eco-morality economy onto society because it's best for everyone. Ecopiety, like all religions, is an attempt to gain control by creating an imagined universal imperative then compelling everyone else to bend the knee.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-20_792_ecopiety.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-20_792_ecopiety.mp3 2:48 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash ecopiety, environmentalism, politics, humor no Sun, 14 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Everyone has biases, especially ideological ones; let's review: Yellow Journalism is the natural state of news as entertainment. Which came first: biased news or biased public opinion? There is no way to combat negative advertising except through civility, which politics lacks. Life isn't so bad for Mr. Magoo but the houseboy's got it rough. Political AI is the final nail in the coffin of democracy. The nasty side of politics is where hate comes from. Party allegiance defies reason, logic, morals, and even sanity. If there wasn't Fake News there wouldn't be any news at all. You would be more surprised if there wasn't a Deep State. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-20_791_ideological_bias_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-20_791_ideological_bias_concepts.mp3 2:10 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash ideology, politics, humor no Fri, 12 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The idea that there is a Deep State, a behind-the-scenes cabal of high level government bureaucrats, protected by their positions and corrupted by their power, that really pull the strings of government, is a plausible, even a predictable one. It's only our indoctrinated sense of fair play and naive preconceptions that makes us flinch when we hear the Deep State is an actual fact; even then, many deny it no matter what evidence exists. The partisan aspect explains the selective thinking; if you're a Democrat, there is no Deep State; if you're a Republican, of course there is. That's almost proof of a Deep State on its own because it shows the substantial support and probability of a cover-up. The suspicion became reality when the Russia Hoax against Trump was investigated and specific individuals who exploited and abused their power had the light shined on their shenanigans: the top officials of the FBI including the former director, the former director of the CIA, the Democratic National Committee, the Hillary Clinton campaign, even foreign governments. That can't have been the first time they've had their finger on the scale but since they were beyond reproach, suggesting a Deep State was a laughable claim before now. The Deep State plot of countless fictional novels and movies has become reality.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-20_790_deep_state.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-20_790_deep_state.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Deep State, humor, politics no Wed, 10 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Misinformation presented as fact, called Fake News, has become an everyday norm. News has always been closely associated with entertainment so it's not such a big surprise that it's become entertainment. In fact, there's a significant portion of the news that's about the news: ratings, the newscasters, whether it's biased. The news is making the news more than real news is. Now, like tabloids, news broadcasters even make up the news; there's no distinction between opinion and fact, hoaxes, false stories, glaring omissions, non-reporting, and strategic denials. Overall, there's a general lack of dispassionate reporting so that viewers can decide for themselves. Fake News is so prevalent today because people want to be told lies, especially by newscasters who insist they aren't lies. Viewers revel in the sense of satisfaction & schadenfreude, and the rush from envy, resentment & anger. These are the same feelings entertainment triggers, but are magnified by being presented as real and immediate. Fake News is ubiquitous because it's the natural state of news, and what inevitably happens. There doesn't have to be an evil cabal with a nefarious plan to take over the world by using the news to indoctrinate people; it's simply the form of self-affirming entertainment viewers are lusting for.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-19_789_fake_news.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-19_789_fake_news.mp3 2:30 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Fake News, news, humor, politics no Mon, 08 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In a 2-Party system, the simple mathematical fact that half of the people will benefit from forcing the other half to share keeps the size of the Parties about equal. Even though only two-thirds of the voters register their Party affiliation, that's certainly enough of a sample to predict the remaining one-third splits in half too. That's why so many elections are only separated by a few percentage points because that's the statistical error. This math explains why an exceptional campaign or especially dismal one on either side rarely sways a Party voter to cross-over. People maintain their Party allegiance, no matter what. There is no doubt that the barrier in America against collectivism has again broken down, though it does take an interest in history to know the last time that occurred was during the Great Depression, and the time before that at the end of the 19th Century. It's a profound ideological shift and one which you would think would cause a significant portion of voters to switch allegiances, or at least stop voting until their Party again more closely represented traditional liberty-based values, but that hasn't been the case at all. In fact, people show the same voting patterns no matter how dramatic the change in their Party's ideology has been. This allegiance to Party rather than position is profoundly disturbing because it means that whoever controls the biggest Party, regardless of how their ideals conflict with traditional American ideals, controls the country.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-19_788_party_allegiance.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-19_788_party_allegiance.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash party allegiance, politics, humor no Sat, 06 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy For all the condemnation of “hate” by The Left, they seem to be the most hateful group in history; the rise of Communism, the physical manifestation of ideological Leftism, has killed more of humanity than even The Plague. What is the feeling that motivates people to call others names, to wish ill upon them, to plot the destruction of their lives and their livelihoods? That's hate, regardless of what inspired it, in this case the ideology of egalitarianism, which is actually an excuse for envy, anger & resentment. The irony is it's these people calling other people “hateful.” It's because of hate that politics has a nasty side: the nasty side of politics is someone in a black mask standing across from you willing to commit violence against you; the nasty side of politics are people at a newscaster's home threatening his family; the nasty side of politics is Fake News, where lies are more common than truth; the nasty side of politics is secret cabals deplatforming dissenting voices through boycotts, brigading, and bullying; and the really nasty side of politics is when people hate you because you won't do as they say.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-18_787_the_nasty_side_of_politics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-18_787_the_nasty_side_of_politics.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash hate, nasty side of politics, politics, humor no Thu, 04 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Computers are proof that any question can be logically answered by asking a series of yes-or-no questions. All human thought can be simulated via computer algorithms based on this underpinning, called Artificial Intelligence, or AI. If you believe that eventually people won't be able to distinguish a computer simulation from a human, then you must accept that any thought, even political thought, can be mimicked and manipulated. That means that political thought all boils down to one fundamental yes-or-no ideological question, where different ideologies have different fundamental questions. America was founded on the fundamental ideological answer, that “yes,” the wants of the individual come first, called liberty. Socialists would answer “no,” that the needs of the group come first. Google, as a private company, thinks it has the right to sway political elections using their monopolistic power. Google is said to be able to sway 5% of the voters any way they want using their AI algorithms, and that's enough to swing most elections. The fact that the Supreme Court gave them that Right is egregious enough, but it's even worse because Google is in the opposite camp to liberty. We literally have a situation where a contrary political AI is going to be vicariously governing America.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-18_786_political_ai.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-18_786_political_ai.mp3 2:38 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash AI, liberty, Google, humor, politics no Tue, 02 Jun 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Mr. Magoo was a famous old cartoon character whose entire shtick was that he had such poor vision that he misidentified everything he saw. Mr. Magoo wasn't very funny but it triggered in the audience a deep-seated recognition of their own life experience; they too knew someone who mischaracterized everything in their own imagined reality. However, Mr. Magoo's life is an accurate metaphor for anybody's life: everyone is the Center-of-the-Universe, and what they think is all that matters; their interpretation of the facts is always the correct one. Confirmation bias is the technical term; interpreting facts fit a specific narrative, often without noticing. It's eerie when two people have the same information, yet draw completely opposite deductions. Politics is rife with the Mr. Magoos: so near-sighted that everything they encounter, they interpret in a biased way; the names they call other people are appropriate because it's their universe and if someone is a racist in their eyes, then they're a racist. There's no penalty for operating this way: Mr. Magoo seems happy and satisfied; in fact, he always comes out better than he started. Yeah, his houseboy, Charlie, had to continually cover for him but Mr. Magoo didn't know that. Actually, Mr. Magoo had it pretty good; it was Charlie, who could see clearly, who always took the fall.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-18_785_mr_magoo.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-18_785_mr_magoo.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Mr. Magoo, confirmation bias, humor, politics no Sun, 31 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In business, it's considered bad form to use negative advertising to attack their competitors though they often do comparisons showing their product is better than the market leaders. However, there's no law against it, and groups sometimes advertise against cigarettes or fossil fuels, but they can't lie, or misinterpret the data without getting sued. Not so with politics; anything can be said about anybody; half-truths, lies, even personal attacks have no consequences. Plus, politics predisposes voters to accept vicious innuendo and lies about the opposition. In a political campaign, the candidate has to spend money to promote themselves, often working alone without any sincere support, but many negative forces will work against them for free, easily overwhelming whatever meager resources and time a fledgling candidate can bring to bear. It's basically a huge inertia of negative energy that must first be overcome before any positive information can get out, if it ever does, and even then it's always overshadowed by the negative. It's no wonder people are suspicious and disdainful of elected officials because the majority of their exposure to them is negative.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-17_784_negative_advertising.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-17_784_negative_advertising.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash negative advertising, negative campaigning, humor, politics no Fri, 29 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Something that young people don't know they're missing is honest news; facts presented without a bias, allowing the reader to formulate their own opinion. There was a few decades after WW2 where that was called “news,” and the word still carries that aura and expectation of objectivity even though it's long since been abandoned. The reality now is that all Americans hear is propaganda, and the side that owns the so-called, news, organizations, are the culprits seeking after the dopamine reward that comes from self-righteousness, outrage, and virtue signaling. When consumers of news are responding to their animal instincts, their intellect doesn't stand a chance, which is why there used to be professionalism in journalism to prevent such exploitation. Of course, media bias isn't new; when mass communication was via newspapers, every town had a “Democrat” and a “Republican” paper, often eponymously named to attract like-minded readers, but the most bias is Left-leaning because altruism is easier to stoke up than staid conscientiousness, and The Left promises to improve the lives of the majority of people, while The Right reassures rich folks that their wealth is secure. Now, there is no obvious indication of bias; in fact, it's surprising how biased the online newsfeeds are; you would expect the algorithms to randomly pick sources, but since that's controlled by Big Tech, the majority of sources listed are tainted Left. It's hard to find a Right-leaning article. Hopefully, the Market can sort this distortion out, or regulation, but nothing is happening yet. Perhaps after the revolution?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-16_783_biased_news.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-16_783_biased_news.mp3 2:57 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash biased news, humor, politics no Wed, 27 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The term, Yellow Journalism, is rare to hear nowadays but it's the same kind of so-called, news, reporting from back in the time when the color of cheap newsprint was yellowish. We've had a resurgence of Yellow Journalism in this country and there doesn't seem to be anyway back short of legislation. Why the change back to times past? Well, since the goal of journalism in a Capitalist economy is to make money, it must be a product, and all products must trigger some basic human urge: entertainment, outrage, greed, curiosity, lust, altruism, sentimentality; and news was no different when newspapers started out, and stayed like that for most of their history. In fact, it’s remarkable “news” was ever not sensationalized, but for a few decades, news journalists defined objectivity as part of a new professionalism. It worked as long as all news outlets voluntarily followed the spirit of the concept but when violating it led to them dominating the market and even controlling politics, all restraint was lifted and news sunk back into the tabloid pit. Unfortunately, the possible alternative of regulating and subsidizing news results in State propaganda. At least in the Market, the egregious rags have to make a profit or they go broke, something a State-sponsored media would never have to worry about, so the indoctrination would be even worse. The fact that Yellow Journalism went away once is proof that it's possible for unbiased news to exist in a Market-driven system; however, since then wealth has concentrated so much in America that gaining control of a media outlet just for the influence it wields, means it doesn't have to be fiscally responsive, only politically expedient.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-16_782_yellow_journalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-16_782_yellow_journalism.mp3 3:09 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Yellow Journalism, humor, politics no Mon, 25 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberty is the greatest concept of all, let's go over it: The dictionary isn't much help distinguishing liberty from freedom but the hints are there. Free Will is the most important ingredient of liberty. When did liberty become unfashionable and how did it ever get into that position? The forces arrayed against liberty are formidable indeed, and precipitate its loss in a democracy. Liberty is direly threatened when wealth is concentrated into the hands of a few. There needs to be a new classification between Classical Liberals and Liberals. It's unfortunate that the most effective voices for liberty have to beg for support. Foreigners don't know what liberty is because they didn't grow up with it. The Freedom Index is a Collectivist distraction to delegitimize America's liberty supremacy. The debate between collectivism and liberty is dishonest and brutal. It's become impossible to amend the Constitution so the Supreme Court is filling in. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-15_781_liberty_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-15_781_liberty_concepts.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, humor, politics no Sat, 23 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The Constitution is a flawed document written by flawed men who happened to be in the right place at the right time, but they had the foresight to include an amendment process, which has worked out pretty well to smooth out the rough edges. There's even been an Amendment canceling an Amendment: the repeal of Prohibition; the 21st over the 18th. Per Article 5, there are two ways to make changes to the Constitution; first, when two-thirds of both House & Senate pass a proposal; or second, through a Constitutional Convention, a method that has never been used, when two-thirds of the States pass a proposal. Both methods require three-quarters of the States to ratify before a proposal becomes an Amendment to the Constitution. So far, 27 Amendments have been added out of the 33 approved by Congress, but there have been 11,700 proposals, typically over 200 proposals a year by various Congressmen trying to appease this or that constituency back home. Unfortunately, there hasn't been a new Amendment in half a century, the Right for 18-year olds to vote. Now, either society hasn't changed much in 50 years, or The Constitution is perfect, or the political process has broken down. During that same period, the advent of the information culture has drastically changed our lives in ways the original authors of the Constitution could not predict, as well as advanced scientific knowledge, and vastly improved communication. Currently, changes due to these issues are being handled by the United States Supreme Court, but that makes nine people the Amendment process, the opposite of representative government, and thwarts the intent of the Constitution. Apparently, Article 5 needs to be amended.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-15_780_amending_the_constitution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-15_780_amending_the_constitution.mp3 3:08 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Amendments, The U.S. Constitution, The Constitution, ratification, humor, politics no Thu, 21 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The choice between liberty and collectivism is the most dangerous ideological schism in America today. Marxists, because of their successful “long march through the institutions,” have gone from being almost illegal to actually gaining the upper hand. A lot of their success has come by denying their success; whenever someone raises an alarm about the attacks on liberty, collectivists either deny, deflect, or redefine liberty, but when the debate gets enough traction, they use more extreme tactics because renewed debate of the superiority of individual liberty over group-think threatens their eminent win. In totalitarian states, dissenters are arrested to take them out of the social fabric, but in democracies the group attempts to marginalize specific individuals by indirect means, such as scorn, ridicule, and shunning; or directly via accusations of unsavory utterances, conduct, or associations. Whether any of the charges are true is irrelevant because they have control of the narrative, and you going on the defensive appears guilty and weak, while an angry response seems immature and unstable. Indeed, you must be extremely careful when responding to accusations; the best strategy is to not respond, or make a desultory or mocking comment. However, if you must reply to show strength or wrest control of the debate, an alternate strategy is to accuse the accuser of accusing: calling a bully a bully, a liar a liar, or a fool a fool. Unfortunately, even if you win, the attackers have successful stymied any debate about liberty.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-15_779_debating_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-15_779_debating_liberty.mp3 2:56 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, debating liberty, humor, politics no Tue, 19 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Words are weapons for ideas, and the ultimate weapon in the battle between liberty and collectivism. One of the often used tactics by the forces arrayed against liberty is to diminish the status of the United States as its standard bearer, to directly attack its liberty strength. The so-called Freedom Index is a prime example of this; the U.S. is ranked #20 or lower, where Canada is #1, and every other Western Nation is more “free.” To begin with the obvious, the goal is liberty; freedom is just part of the equation, and how free can you be when you're not responsible for your own actions and someone else is making decisions for you? It's informative to see who does the Freedom Index ranking: Leftist German "think tanks.” In a Marxist value system, where liberty is actually demonized, it's amazing America ranked so highly! Just for giggles, let's assume that Canada and Western Europe are the “freedom” nations, then it's time for them to buck up and assume their responsibilities to the World. Get their military up to snuff so they can defend "freedom" around the globe, start donating major money to World development, increase the competitiveness of their universities, and all-around fulfill their "freedom" obligations. They should be the Freedom Police now, but instead, they're riding America's not-so-”freedom” back. Apparently, they just want to claim they're "free," without doing anything about it.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-14_778_freedom_index.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-14_778_freedom_index.mp3 2:45 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash freedom index, liberty, humor, politics no Sun, 17 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy “Liberty” is a famous word; the motto of the French Republic is “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,” and therein lies the problem of why America's definition of liberty is not the same as the rest of the world, because just reading the motto, it's clear their “liberty” is a collectivist liberty, while the U.S. espouses individual liberty. Though America adopted its definition of liberty first, the idea of individual sovereignty, autonomy & agency, was too different from what Europeans were used to, which was having their lives controlled by aristocrats. The idea that the rabble could make decisions was considered irresponsible; Europeans were only willing to exchange dynastic elitism for democratically elected elitism; still accepting the idea that somebody else was better able to make decisions about what was best for everyone. All Western nations but America has this mindset, so democratic socialism is their idea of liberty. Foreigners always conflate liberty with freedom, claiming they are just as free, or even more so, than Americans, but that's a specious argument since liberty is not freedom, though freedom is an important ingredient of liberty. Americans define liberty as making decisions for yourself and reaping the benefits or suffering the consequences of your own actions, bounded only by the liberty of others as specified in the U.S. Constitution. You are responsible for yourself and other people are responsible for themselves, which seems like selfishness to a socialist, so they can't understand America's preoccupation with liberty. People have to be immersed in liberty since childhood to think for themselves and make their own decisions; expecting an adult to suddenly understand how to act and what is expected of them when dumped into a liberty environment is unrealistic. Foreigners can be forgiven their ignorance of liberty, but native-born Americans can't.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-14_777_foreigners_dont_understand_what_liberty_means.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-14_777_foreigners_dont_understand_what_liberty_means.mp3 3:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, foreigners, humor, politics no Fri, 15 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Since liberty isn't taught anywhere anymore, the only place for people who want to learn about it are in the alternative media: online videos and podcasts. There are still written explanations but who reads? It's telling that most of the people who promote liberty in these venues are independent; some guy in his kitchen talking into an iPhone. I find that both concerning and compelling because discussing liberty has become underground. In fact, many liberty advocates are being censored by the Marxist opponents who have gained control of the media platforms. This constant threat of de-platforming and demonitization has forced these champions of liberty to constantly beg for support in the form of money from their audience. Sometimes a listener must endure several minutes of promotion for survival gear or gold before the real show even starts. These constant requests for donations are more than irritating, they are actually hampering the flow of liberty instruction; how many potential libertyists, with their conditioned 10-second attention span, simply going to click to a cat video? It's a Catch 22: asking to support liberty reduces liberty's support. Who would have imagined that liberty would be in retreat, taught in the shadows, with penalties for all involved if identified. It's like Revolutionary times.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-14_776_pandering_for_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-14_776_pandering_for_liberty.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, demontization, deplatform, politics, humor no Wed, 13 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy “Liberal” is one of those strange words, like “modern,” that are both a concept and description, and though their concepts remains the same, what they describe changes over time; modern things of 50 years ago are not modern today but you still use the word “modern” to describe things. “Liberal” is the same way; 50 years ago, you may have been liberal but if you don't change with the times, you're not liberal anymore; in fact, by definition, you're a conservative. That's why using “Liberal” as a political label has become so confusing as to make the word unusable; it's more of a slur now, and there are few people that know the original definition. Former Liberals, mostly White men, now call themselves Classical Liberals, but that term is already taken too, by Friedrich Hayek-style Classical Liberals from the generation even before, and that definition is conservative in comparison, even though their focus on liberty is the same. The new Classical Liberals are wealth redistributors, through taxation, Welfare, and inheritance; whereas original Classical Liberals are not. New Classical Liberals are less religious, more egalitarian, and foreign policy doves compared to Old School Classical Liberals. It's obvious that the term “Classical Liberal” has the same problem as “Liberal;” it's time for a new word to describe this group between the two, perhaps “Libertyist,” because liberty is now the dividing line.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-13_775_liberal_vs_classical_liberal.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-13_775_liberal_vs_classical_liberal.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberal, classical liberal, humor, politics no Mon, 11 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Capitalism matches up with liberty pretty closely, and it creates more wealth than any other economic system, but Capitalism has the major flaw that it concentrates wealth. Concentrated wealth has always been a specter; James Madison, the author of the U.S. Constitution, said, “the day will come when our Republic will be an impossibility because wealth will be concentrated in the hands of a few.” Madison's prescience has become reality: the top 1% now own 40% percent of the country's wealth; more wealth than the bottom 90%; and in less than a decade, their portion of wealth increased by 3% while the bottom 90% fell, increasingly so. Liberty is an abstract concept, wealth is not. In reality, liberty only directly benefits a segment of the population, but it still works as long as that number is large enough, perhaps 25% of everybody, because people, by-in-large, even today, are live-and-let-live, especially if they're doing okay too. Lack of wealth is not a deal-breaker but the human psyche, being what it is, won't suffer the perceived indignity of wild wealth disparity after some point. In that scenario, unfortunately liberty loses its luster, and in a democracy, socialism seems more attractive. Actually, for most of the population, that's probably true, which is why wealth concentration drives people to socialism; The 1% won't be affected by the change, but the 24% lose out.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-13_774_concentrated_wealth_threatens_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-13_774_concentrated_wealth_threatens_liberty.mp3 2:50 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash wealth concentration, liberty, liberty threatened, humor, politics no Sat, 09 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberty is a fragile thing, hard to obtain and easy to lose. A lot of people don't like liberty; being responsible for yourself is frightening and difficult, plus if you're responsible for yourself then someone else can't say they are. The theists don’t like liberty because they think everyone should be forced to share their morals; Collectivists don’t like liberty because they think the needs of the group outweigh the wants of the individual; Elitists don't like liberty because they should be the ones making decisions that are best for everyone, themselves in particular; and people who simply want someone else to be responsible for them just don't like liberty either; that's a lot of people, enough in a democracy to defeat liberty at the ballot box. America was lucky to get liberty in the first place but it was only maintained through indoctrination in the schools which obviously doesn't happen any longer; in fact, the schools have become a training ground for the opposite of liberty, forced conformity. There was hope that the freedom of the Internet would be an avenue to promote liberty, but the forces that oppose liberty have control of Social Media. The enemies of liberty have also captured the legacy media and entertainment; they promise equality & security & inclusion, all contrary to liberty; and they're winning. It will be sad to see liberty go; luckily, I was around at the best time to experience it. It's doubtful future generations will even know what real liberty is?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-13_773_losing_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-13_773_losing_liberty.mp3 2:44 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, losing liberty, humor, politics no Thu, 07 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Everything runs its course, even liberty. Say something enough times, especially with contradictory data all around you, fake or not, and what was once a given, goes out of vogue. If you're raised not making decisions for yourself, wouldn't it seem odd if suddenly you were responsible? Without experience, there's going to be a lot of missteps, and lack of understanding of what the obligations are; it's simply easier to reject the whole concept of liberty. Plus, if someone else is responsible, you aren't. Add a healthy dose of altruism: homeless camps and haphazard healthcare, and there's plenty of proof liberty doesn't work. There's more proof that the opposite, Marxism, is even worse, but most folks aren't good at nuance: yes or no, that's the only equation they understand; and of course, something new is always better. There are plenty of countries that are entitlement Welfare states; we, as Americans, were resistant due to our liberty indoctrination but that isn't happening anymore. Where do impressionable children learn about liberty now? Where are they going to practice it when its youthful institutions like Boy & Girl Scouts, church summer camps, and competitive sports where only the best get a trophy, are in decline. Liberty has become unfashionable, and will become passé soon if it hasn't already, no military coup necessary; we'll eat organic food, ride bikes, steal intellectual property, and complain about the greedy, selfish, ambitious people who leave to go somewhere else where liberty is still alive, if there is anywhere?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-12_772_when_liberty_is_passe.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-12_772_when_liberty_is_passe.mp3 2:55 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Tue, 05 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In previous epochs, people thought their lives were dictated by fate. Even today, intelligent sophists propose we're all in a giant computer simulation where everything we do is predictable. Contrarily, Free Will is the belief that your life results from the decisions you make, not some preordained script. The confusion comes because luck plays such an important role in every outcome, so it can easily be confused with divine interference. The concept of Free Will is a relatively new phenomena, only espoused the few hundred years since The Enlightenment. Western culture was founded on it even though the majority of the people were still enthralled by fate. As time went by, Free Will gained strength but it requires freedom, and opportunity to act, which is why it's an integral part of liberty. Liberty only makes sense in the context of Free Will; if you're not making decisions for yourself, what you think is in your best interest given the knowledge you currently have, then you don't really have liberty. Unfortunately, Free Will or not, some people don’t have the intellectual ability to make conscientious decisions for themselves, and many more are uncomfortable being responsible for their own lives. The result in a democracy is that it’s not uncommon for cowardly groups to become a majority, voluntarily surrendering everyone’s Free Will so that they don't have to exercise theirs.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-12_771_free_will.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-12_771_free_will.mp3 2:46 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Free Will, fate, humor, politics no Sun, 03 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy People often conflate liberty and freedom, thinking they're the same thing, and the confusion is not clarified by the dictionary definitions of the two words. In the dictionary, liberty is defined as “the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views, and the power or scope to act as one pleases.” That's not how Americans define liberty, but the listed synonyms for liberty are: independence, autonomy, sovereignty, self-government, self rule, self-determination, home rule, free will, and choice; my goodness, the synonyms define liberty better than the definition, except that “freedom” is included as one of them. Unfortunately, liberty’s dictionary definition does not explicitly say “responsibility for your own actions” which would delineate it from Marxist liberty, but the common Oxford dictionary is European and can’t be expected to promote a uniquely American concept.   So how does the dictionary define freedom: “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint, absence of subjection to foreign domination or despotic government, and the state of not being imprisoned or enslaved.” That's a good definition of freedom but the synonyms are almost the same ones used for liberty, including the word “liberty.” Worse, they include “self-sufficiency” which is primarily a liberty concept; no wonder people get so confused. In reality, American “liberty” is making choices for yourself and reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of your actions bounded only by the liberty of others, while “freedom” is the ability to do so.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-12_770_dictionary_definition_of_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-12_770_dictionary_definition_of_liberty.mp3 3:11 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, freedom, humor, politics no Fri, 01 May 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review what we know about banking: It's technically impossible for Government to save money. Central Banks are the Invisible Hand controlling commerce. Without The Fed, the economy would have collapsed already, maybe several times. Printing money is government's second most effective tool, after violence. EBT could be a State's way of printing money. Shadow Banking dwarfs regulated banking, and will contribute to the next financial crash just like it did the last one. The Export-Import bank is corporate welfare for Boeing. America's Debt never really meant anything, and now people are starting to figure that out. The Debt Ceiling is an artifice more fiction than fact. Debt Collectors do a dirty job but somebody has to. Payday Loans are no more exploitative than traffic tickets. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-11_769_banking_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-11_769_banking_concepts.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash banking, humor, politics no Wed, 29 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy High interest, so-called Payday loans, are often demonized but the reality is totally different. Convenience and routine are valuable, and traditional banks, with their inconvenient practices, feeling of elitism, and constant fees are not an attractive alternative to many people. In fact, predatory banking overdraft charges and interest penalties could easily exceed the cost of a Payday loan. The interest amount on a Payday loan is about the same as many credit cards but nobody seems to care about them, and credit cards can compound relentlessly whereas the local Payday loan place knows you, and advises you to pay-up in the nicest way possible. A lot of people just need that nanny-like intercession to stay above water; though make no mistake, people who use Payday loans don't have a lot of options. Payday loans are big business; you can find them in failing strip malls around America unless the local politicians have made them the scapegoat of failed social policy, and banned their presence, even though every payday you can see a line of people waiting to pay 15% for the 2 weeks since their last paycheck; they're always one check behind. It seems rather ridiculous but obviously a lot of people start a job, get a loan, pay it when they get their first check, then borrow until their next paycheck. This is not the same as the Check-Cashing business that takes 2% off the top to cash this week's check. All things considered, Payday loans satisfy an important social need; it's immaterial that they prey on human weakness, so do hair-dressers and dietitians.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-11_768_payday_loans.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-11_768_payday_loans.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash payday loan, humor, politics no Mon, 27 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Businesses factor in the amount of defaults on payments they expect so everyone pays for the people who don't pay, and you can be indignant about that, but when you consider that a majority of people have no savings, and live day-to-day, it's more likely you're the one reneging on loans, so for most people, escaping from Debt Collectors should be something that's taught in school. First thing folks need to know is that for consumer debt, the kind you run up on your credit card, simply wait 6 years, called the Statute of Limitations, and voila', debt neutralized because your State won't let your wages be attached after that, though your credit rating will be affected, if that's something you care about. This isn't the same thing as bankruptcy which prevents Debt Collectors from ever calling you again because they will. Collecting from dead-beats is problematic, so Debt Collectors will buy a large pool of delinquent accounts at a deep discount and try to collect it themselves. These are the horror stories you hear about because successful Debt Collectors are tenacious and relentless: repeated calls at home, at your mom's home, and any other place they suspect you're staying. Sociopath debtors don't care but altruistic ones can be made to feel guilty and harassed, and often will pay rather than face the barrage of calls. Debt Collectors know this so some even specialize in expired debt, which they purchase super cheap. It's just as easy to scam people who think they owe money, or their parents think they do, or their grandparents, or the accountant was just writing checks and the bill was in the stack. This only applies to unsecured debt; stop making payments on your house or car, and the Repo Man is coming. The Statute of Limitations doesn't apply to taxes, and crazy as it may seem, not to student loans either.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-11_767_debt_collectors.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-11_767_debt_collectors.mp3 3:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash debt collectors, humor, politics no Sat, 25 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The idea of a Debt Ceiling comes from Article I of the U.S. Constitution, saying that Congress must authorize spending, back when accounting was first confused with economics, and only Alexander Hamilton seemed to understand the imaginary aspect of money. Debt Ceilings are an emotional issue, not really a financial one; it makes no practical difference what the Debt Ceiling is or even the amount of spending, but there are irrational fears at play from some antiquated, anachronistic misunderstanding of money, mixed with a healthy dose of pontification & demagoguery by politicians preying on fear to stay in power. Nowadays, the politics of raising the Debt Ceiling dominates the news cycle more and more frequently as a way to leverage power; it's how Parties can hold everyone hostage to single political positions; like border control or universal healthcare. In fact, the Debt Ceiling is even more arcane and useless than it sounds because it doesn't limit spending, only government paying for it; a nonsensical farce where congress authorizes the spending but not the payment. Ostensibly this could end up bad but it never has, and never will because there is no limit of extraordinary maneuvering and bookkeeping which can be used to circumvent its intent, which is to limit the power of government; nothing can do that.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-10_766_debt_ceiling.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-10_766_debt_ceiling.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Debt Ceiling, humor, politics no Thu, 23 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy America's debt is the accumulating difference between how much government spends versus how much taxes it collects. America hasn't had to balance its budget in decades, essentially getting its cake and eating it too.The debt is accounted for by the total amount of Treasuries issued, now well into the mid-20 trillions of dollars, which doesn't even cause any concern anymore because of how long debt-alarmists have been crying wolf. People have arguments of why continuing debt is a good thing or bad thing; good because of the stimulus it provides, and bad because they think someone has to eventually pay, not understanding that government can create as much imaginary money as they want, for as long as they want. There's also been the persuasive percentage of GNP argument which says The Debt is fine as long as it's less than some fraction of the GNP, the Gross National Product, now over 100%; but that isn't relevant because no amount of debt is worrisome as long as production equals consumption. The fascade usually used to explain why nothing bad has happened yet is; that it's mostly Social Security and government retirement obligations; or other nations are shouldering it, putting America at their mercy, but that threat doesn't matter to a nation whose dollar is the world's reserve currency, because when you're the 600-lb. gorilla, what other nations do is immaterial. America's debt isn’t going away, and there’s nothing wrong with it; in fact, deficit spending puts money in the populace's hands that wouldn’t otherwise be there, so everyone benefits even though the money eventually all ends up in the hands of The 1%, but concentration of wealth is another problem entirely.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-10_765_americas_debt.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-10_765_americas_debt.mp3 2:58 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash National Debt, humor, politics no Tue, 21 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Imaginary money is only valuable as long as there's force to say it is. This works pretty well within a nation's borders but when other nations would like to buy things from the U.S. but their money isn't really worth anything because all they do is grow bananas, what's a money-printing nation to do? This is where the Export-Import, EXIM, bank comes in. Banana republics can buy Boeing airplanes because the U.S. government-funded EXIM gives them the money to do so then eventually writes if off as Foreign Aid. It's actually not a bad idea, creating jobs and stimulating the economy of both countries for nothing more than a relatively small increase in the National Debt, to the tune of $20 billion per year. Unfortunately, as always happens when Market-forces feedback is lacking, the EXIM is prone to exploitation; for example, 80% of the loans actually go to Boeing. Special Interests are also a problem; EXIM Board-members are shareholders of some of the companies benefiting; and as bizarre as it may seem, EXIM loans supplied the money for China to improve its nuclear technology. These fallacies have not gone unnoticed, and there's a lot of resistance to EXIM; in fact, politicians regularly call for its end so the funding legislation is passed surreptitiously during catastrophes, like the night of a mass shooting. The EXIM is very successful at creating lots of jobs, and is a foreign policy success, but make no mistake about it, when folks talk about Corporate Welfare, the Export-Import Bank is an example of what they mean.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-10_764_export-import_bank.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-10_764_export-import_bank.mp3 3:02 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Export-Import Bank, EXIM, humor, politics no Sun, 19 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Capitalism is the abstract idea that special people can imagine money exists, then loan it to ordinary people who work for a living to get some of that imaginary money. The concept sounds exploitative, and it is, but it works because it harnesses the inestimable ambition, avarice and greed of the human species. Because the exploitation can quickly overwhelm the delicate balance of Capitalism, regulated banking was created by government, but still over half of all money-lending is unregulated, called “shadow banking.” To put the size of shadow banking in perspective, consider that the 50 richest people in the world combined have about $2 trillion dollars. There's $7 trillion in gold around the world, and about the same in amount in paper money. Globally, Stock Markets total $73 trillion. Finally, all the Real Estate in the world is worth $217 trillion. Compare those numbers to the total debt around the world of $215 trillion and it all kind of makes sense, except the near equivalence is completely dwarfed by $544 trillion of derivatives lurking in the realm of shadow banking. Shadow banking caused the near financial meltdown in 2008, and it will probably instigate the next financial crash.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-09_763_shadow_banking.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-09_763_shadow_banking.mp3 3:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash shadow banking, money, humor, politics no Fri, 17 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy “We Accept EBT,” for Electronic Benefit Transfer, is often advertised on the windows of convenience stores; that's how States give away Welfare money; they also give away Smartphones to keep track of it; it's the new Welfare coupons of yesteryear. Whether you support Welfare or not, EBT is here to stay, and probably grow, so with that in mind, it should be exercised to its full monetary potential. Primarily, since EBT is fiat currency, meaning nothing exists to back it up, it could hypothetically not cost taxpayers to support it, especially since it's all done electronically. The State could credit the EBT recipient's online accounts, and from there on it's used like any other cardless, wireless payment from their phone; the magic of imaginary money then takes over. First, there is a fluctuating exchange rate from State EBT dollars to federal dollars. Welfare is intended to be used, not saved, so EBT dollars could age out, meaning the longer since they've been issued, the less they're worth in exchange. This would insure their quick circulation, and difficulty in gaming the system as unscrupulous vendors used to do with Welfare coupons. Next, to keep EBT viable, the State could accept fees, fines, and even taxes, in EBT dollars, and due to the depreciating nature of EBT, they would be heavily discounted, which would encourage the fine-payers to obtain and use them. Because imaginary money can support lots of imaginary debt, much more EBT could be issued than is actually funded, and a robust secondary EBT market would surely develop to facilitate efficient use of the imaginary money; these last-second, deeply discounted transactions that would not otherwise occur, would absorb the difference between EBT versus real money. EBT could be its own autonomous financial system that served the particular needs and desires of the constituents of the State from which it's issued. EBT, one of government's greatest powers, is being underutilized due to a lack of comprehension of imaginary money.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-09_762_ebt_creates_money.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-11-09_762_ebt_creates_money.mp3 3:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash EBT, Electronic Benefit Transfer, money, politics, humor no Wed, 15 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Nothing gets conservative economists buzzing louder than suggesting that government should print more money, even though it would eliminate most of the need for taxes. It's especially controversial when confronting the reality of so-called “trust” funds; otherwise people would know that Social Security, Medicare, and government retirement benefits are actually Ponzi schemes, and always have been. If you can print your own money like government can, a Ponzi scheme isn't such a terrible thing, but it conflicts with conservative monetary policy which proclaims it to be inflationary, even though the U.S. government has printed more than enough money to trigger inflation if that were the case. Inflation-alarmists are confusing correlation with causation; it's not printing money that causes a collapse; it's the collapse in production that causes inflation in times of panic as all the imaginary money, way more than there are things to buy, looks for something real to exchange for; like goods and property. However, the unspoken reason conservative economists don't like to print money is that it has a tendency to redistribute wealth. It's not coincidental that these are the same people that see nothing wrong with extreme wealth concentration.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-27_761_printing_money.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-27_761_printing_money.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash inflation, money, humor, politics no Mon, 13 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The Federal Reserve Bank, the de facto implementation of a Central Bank in the United States, was created by Congress in 1913 to stabilize the famously volatile banking system. It's composed of 12 regional Reserve Banks, and governed by a presidential-appointed Board. All of these people have Capitalist interests but work in a socialist framework, mostly successfully, creating imaginary money to cure real monetary problems. Because the imaginary nature of money is hard to imagine, The Fed has become a scapegoat for monetarists who have no imagination. The Fed is most famous for setting interest rates, but does a lot more. It buys U.S. Treasuries at zero interest and can forgive them, essentially making part of the National Debt disappear. Even more importantly, but least publicized, is that through various subsidiaries, The Fed can act like a Central Bank and participate in the Stock Market. They’re among the foreign Central Banks driving up stock prices, a means of controlling the Volatility Index, stabilizing the banking system while protecting retirement accounts. Right now, The Fed is holding over $4 trillion of Treasuries, and nobody quite knows what their equity holdings are, but probably a similar number, dwarfing the federal budget. This all seems rather manipulative and suspect, fueling the Libertarian view that The Fed is preventing private Markets from fixing all of America's economic ills, but it's more likely that The Fed is barely holding off economic catastrophe; the question is, for how long?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-27_760_the_fed.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-27_760_the_fed.mp3 2:47 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Federal Reserve, The Fed, humor, politics no Sat, 11 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Central Banks are one of those mysterious organizations that you think you know what they do by their name but you can't really give an example. Central Banks are usually publicly owned but in some cases, like The Fed in the U.S., they are so-called public-private partnerships, meaning they get the profit with the public taking the risk. Central Banks are currently the most powerful force in economics; fully utilizing the imaginary aspect of money to influence loans and stock markets. For example, since Japan went into recession over a decade ago, its Central Bank has bought huge portions of its businesses. In fact, Japan's government, through its Central Bank, owns over 40% of the Nikkei stock market index and by extension, most everything in Japan. The bad is that a government actually owns the nation, but the good is that the nation is still going. That's quite a tradeoff, and the same thing is happening in the rest of the world. If you let your inner conspiracy-theory genie run wild, it's almost as if Central Banks are the means for the ultra-wealthy Elites to control the world. They are secretive, their ownership is opaque, and their power is complete, so it's possible but what is the purpose? Do ultra-rich and powerful people need to be richer and more powerful? Are they doing what they think is best for everyone? It's a risky gamble because when the world economy eventually does fail, as it certainly will, and penniless people are looking for someone to blame, they'll know where to look to get fodder for the guillotines: Central Bankers.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-26_759_central_banks.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-26_759_central_banks.mp3 3:01 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Central Bank, politics, humor no Thu, 09 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Government can't save money but it's not because they don't want to, it's actually impossible. Are they going to put it in a bank? The money in banks isn't saved either. Are they going to put paper bills in a vault somewhere like Fort Knox? That's not efficient even if a trillion dollar bill was printed to save space. Right now government buys Treasuries from themselves, but how is transferring money from one hand to the other, and getting nothing but a promise from yourself in return, saving money? There is no way a government that creates imaginary money can save it because they're the ones that guarantee the imaginary money is real in the first place; if they can do that, why not just print more money when they need it? In fact, that's what they really do. It's correct to say that money not spent is saved but that same argument could be used to justify never spending money, so “saving” isn't really the correct word for not spending; frugality is. Saving means money is collected ahead of time, like Social Security, which isn't saved anywhere; it's spent too. Accounting gymnastics aside, the best government can do is imagine it's saving imaginary money.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-26_758_government_cant_save_money.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-26_758_government_cant_save_money.mp3 2:19 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash savings, money, humor, politics no Tue, 07 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review a few of the most interesting aspects of public financing: Government's financial responsibilities shouldn't be on the backs of Ma & Pa businesses. Regardless of the ideology, The Great Depression ended because of stimulated consumption. Even if there was such thing as a Star Trek Replicator, people would still have to work to have meaning. Universal Basic Income is a bad idea, but if there's going to be one, print the money. The question is how many consumers can there be for every producer. The Paramount Rule Of Economics, that production must equal consumption, should be printed on the back of milk cartons. Productivity can't be put in the bank, and no amount of money can change that. Public transportation is political while private ride-sharing actually solves the problem. There should be no such thing as a publicly-funded sports stadium. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-25_757_public_finance_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-25_757_public_finance_concepts.mp3 2:52 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash public finance, politics, humor no Sun, 05 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Using public money to build private sports stadiums is a well-understood phenomenon: many voters are sports fans, and they think everyone is a sports fan, and since most people vote in their own selfish interest, no politician can walk away without cover. This is the epitome of crony-Capitalism, and one of the most difficult problems to prevent. Government and industry need to be in an adversarial relationship, not counter-productively, but as restraints on one-another. This should be obvious to anyone in business, but the insipid rhetoric of social-engineering only requires votes, not honesty. Elected officials are not held accountable financially or legally to the sweetheart deals they commit to; in fact, they often benefit from campaign contributions, and sometimes after they leave office. Even tiny municipal leaders leverage their little bit of power: Wenatchee, Washington defaulted on a huge bond for a failed arena there, and then were brazen enough to try and get the whole State to cover their bad judgment, which never should have been allowed in the first place. There needs to be legislation preventing municipalities from so-called “public-private partnerships,” specifically preventing taxpayer-funded bonds for sports stadiums.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-25_756_publicly-funded_sports_stadiums.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-25_756_publicly-funded_sports_stadiums.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Publicly-Funded Sports Stadiums, politics, humor no Fri, 03 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Public transportation has become an ideological war: the equality folks who think everyone should ride together versus the Market-types who wonder why there are still rails on the ground. Buses are last century, and trains the one before that. No bus comes to your house; no bus is on your schedule; there is no choice of buses if you don't like one; buses have a fixed, often congested, route; bad public buses don't go out of business; and buses don't pay for themselves, they're subsidized by taxpayers. More subtly but equally important; there's no way to get rid of bus public employee unions. Public transportation is an Equalist ideal where everyone has exactly the same seat on the subway, no premiums, and they are all forced to sit together; no manspreading. Removed of the egalitarian baggage, transportation issues just aren't that difficult to solve; in fact, the Market is solving them right now in the form of Uber and driverless cars. Uber shows up at your door when you want them to and goes right where you want them to in the most efficient way possible; you know exactly how much you're paying; and you can allow additional passengers or not, your choice; plus, you can choose to upgrade your experience. Best of all: bad service and you choose another provider; there's surge capacity; and no public pension obligations. To a liberty-minded person, it seems like the perfect solution but, of course, it isn't equal.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-25_755_public_transportation_vs_ride-sharing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-25_755_public_transportation_vs_ride-sharing.mp3 2:50 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Uber, public transportation, buses, humor, politics no Wed, 01 Apr 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Because money can be saved and money is often exchanged for productivity, people make the natural assumption that productivity can be saved, but it can’t. There's no where that automobiles or apples can be put with enough storage for use 10 years from now. In a very real sense, you eat what you kill; there is no magic replicator that turns out unlimited goods exactly when you want them at no cost to yourself or society. Populations as a whole must produce what they consume, and even if they were very productive in the past, it doesn't changes the math; somebody, somewhere is producing what someone else is consuming. The situation where this reality impacts the most is retirement. Retirement is a modern concept; people used to produce until they couldn't anymore, and there was enough excess productivity to accommodate the small numbers of non-producers. Modern sensibilities that everyone deserves to become a consumer-only for the last third of their lives is totally unsustainable. There's the false notion that people earned their retirement, that they somehow saved their overproduction for later but that's blatantly impossible, no matter how much money they've saved. Suppose every retiree has $10 million in the bank, and they’re going to want to exchange that money for production in the future, but if there’s only one worker per retiree, and the worker produces $2K/month and the retiree wants $10K/month in products, how’s that going to work out?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-24_754_cant_save_productivity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-24_754_cant_save_productivity.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash productivity, consumption, retirement, politics, humor no Mon, 30 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Though there is one law of economics above all others, few people seem to know it, and fewer still ever mention it in public: production must equal consumption. Any economy that violates this rule can continue a while longer by borrowing from other nations, or plundering the accumulated wealth of others, but eventually even that runs out. Throughout history, you ate the turnips you laboriously grew yourself or you starved to death; even with trade, a farmer's options were limited by how many turnips the family could grow. The dividing line into modern times is the Adam Smith concept of increased productivity through specialization, which increased productivity 10-fold, 100-fold, so much that people now take it for granted, and have forgot the Productivity Rule. As the generations of scarcity died off, ambitious politicians exploited young people's naivety about work by postulating economic schemes that encourage consumption without commensurate production. They promise that people no longer have to work, and promote the idea that everyone should only have to do what makes them happiest, coddled by a benevolent society. It's an alluring promise, one that anyone would take, especially if they've also been convinced that it's owed to them due to birth, reparations, or retirement. This is natural, and society must consciously pushback, but it's difficult when impressionable children are raised to aspire to only doing things that are meaningful rather than productive.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-24_753_paramount_rule_of_economics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-24_753_paramount_rule_of_economics.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Adam Smith, productivity rule, economics, humor, politics no Sat, 28 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Throughout history, it was always a challenge for a single human being to produce as much as it consumed which is one of the main reasons for society, but even that was problematic during strenuous times, like drought. Luckily, as technology developed, the increased productivity provided more than enough for everyone as long as they contributed at some level. However, even advancing technology is not enough if people become complacent and stop producing at all. It’s unrealistic to think 1 in 10 people can be productive enough for everybody but it's getting close to that now: 10% of the U.S. population of 330 million people have an IQ less than 83; so stupid the military is not allowed to induct them: that's 20 million people; then there are the retired: that's 40 million people; and kids: that's 75 million people; Disability: another 14 million; so about half the population must be supported by the other half. Now consider that 70% of those that do work have no savings and can barely get by, which leaves 50 million people to support the leisurely lifestyle of over 210 million people; 1 person must support over 5, and it's only going to get worse.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-23_752_consumers_outnumber_producers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-23_752_consumers_outnumber_producers.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash producers, consumers, humor, politics no Thu, 26 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy People always confuse Capitalism with entrepreneurship but entrepreneurs are producers while Capitalism is a game of moving money around to make more money; Capitalists produce nothing, yet they accumulate wealth much, much faster than producers. Capitalism incentivizes the largest consumers to be the least productive while simultaneously concentrating wealth in their hands. One way to alleviate this perverse outcome is to give money to everyone else, known as the Universal Basic Income, or UBI, but the question is, how to pay for it. The money used by Capitalism is imaginary, it exists in a bank's ledger someplace and nowhere else. UBI can similarly be implemented with imaginary money, imagined by government rather than by banks. The government would essentially “print” money for everyone else. This would put a similar amount of money in the hands of the 99% as the 1%. It doesn’t solve the consumption problem because UBI recipients don’t work either, so the whole thing would end in a busted economy, but it does give an interesting viewpoint to contempt how money works.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-23_751_printing_money_for_ubi.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-23_751_printing_money_for_ubi.mp3 2:11 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash capitalism, UBI, money, humor, politics no Tue, 24 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Imagine for a moment that science fiction became reality, and that Star Trek-style replicators existed: food, clothing, housing, entertainment was all 100% provided at no cost to anyone else; how would that affect life? Why would anyone do anything if they didn't want to? There's only science and art remaining for people to engage in since the drudgeries of life would be taken care of. Science is knowledge for knowledge sake, and seems unlikely to attract more than the small fraction of folks motivated by esotericism; so presumably, everyone would be creating art, but it's not hard to imagine where that leads? Taken to the extreme like this identifies the fundamental flaw in the whole concept of a Universal Basic Income, or UBI: people work to achieve something but if nothing has any value because everything is free, why achieve anything? Let alone the burden to pay for UBI placed on a society without a free replicator, and since no one would care about work ethic, it wouldn't take long before consumption was greater than production, leading to subsequent collapse; but even assuming there is a replicator, society would simply eat itself to death while playing videogames, watching football & masturbating.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-22_750_replicator.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-22_750_replicator.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash UBI, universal basic income, replicator, politics, humor no Sun, 22 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The Great Depression lasted almost a decade in the 1930s. It seems a long time ago now, and has little relevance except that it was the largest of a long string of economic downturns that have periodically punctured the ever-increasing financial bubble that is the American economy, and for that reason it is endlessly invoked, analyzed, and debated. The most contentious issue is how it ended? There are several explanations; from president Roosevelt's New Deal and government spending on WW2, to the claim that government intervention in the Free Markets caused it, kept it going, and it burned out naturally due to a new economic cycle starting. The reason a dispute exists is because it embodies the arguments for and against stimulus spending; liberal versus conservative economic theory. First, The Depression ended in 1941 because America was at full capacity almost immediately after entering the war, so everyone had a job, and government borrowing was paying their wages. This was soon followed by the G.I. Bill which allowed lots of people to buy houses, and soldiers to go to college, again government printing money. The worldwide depression ended because lots of people died, and the stuff they used to have was distributed to other people, making them richer, and there was a huge pent-up demand because of the deprivations of the war. The Great Depression ended because of dramatically increased consumption, and increased production to match; which is always the ending whatever the reason.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-22_749_what_ended_the_depression.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-22_749_what_ended_the_depression.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Great Depression, politics, humor no Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Of the 5.6 million businesses in the U.S., 99.7% of of them are “small,” most just Ma & Pa running a restaurant, bluecollar service, or some other shoestring enterprise. The owners work long hours with few vacations, and barely get by, if they do at all since half of small businesses fail within the first year. Unfortunately, as hard as being in business is, somehow these striving entrepreneurs are saddled with society's obligations as well as their own, probably because they have no voice in government: they're too busy working and don't have any money. Our broken democracy votes to make Ma & Pa pay for government's obligations: who has to pay Minimum Wage, not government; it's Ma & Pa. They often don't make Minimum Wage themselves, and work way beyond the protected workweek, but are held responsible for these things for any employees they hire. An employee wants maternity/paternity leave; that's on Ma & Pa's back. Unemployment insurance: it's them, though they have none for themselves. Social Security & Medicare: Ma & Pa pay twice as much as their employees, and have to chip in half for their employees, but they don't get any themselves. If society wants perks for its workers, society should pay for it, not Ma & Pa because Ma & Pa aren't your ma & pa.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-21_748_ma__pa.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-21_748_ma__pa.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Minimum Wage, employee, humor, politics no Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy What is patriotism anymore? Let's review the concept: America's old values of God, guns, gas & GIs have become anti-values. The Pledge of Allegiance is from a time when people reveled in pageantry. Nationalism is making a slow comeback against the forces of Globalism but it's still losing. A new military draft for political reasons would cause its own war. Soldiering is a job just like any other job except it's an example of successful Marxism. In a war between America and the rest of the world, bet on America. The National Guard is a buffer against the federal mercenary military. America-haters are the hateful type who call other people hateful. America's Foreign Policy is called that because it's captured by foreigners. Ex-pats from America are suspect because why would anyone abandon America voluntarily? You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-21_747_patriotism_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-21_747_patriotism_concepts.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash patriotic, patriotism, humor, politics no Mon, 16 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Be very suspicious of Westerners that choose to live in Southeast Asia; the language, food and chaos are totally alien to our culture; not to mention the living conditions. It's the epitome of being a nice place to visit but... There's very few reasons why Westerners would voluntarily choose exile; it seems likely that most expatriates are prohibited from going back to their home country, usually for various nefarious reasons; mostly to do with escaping prosecution for something they've done or owe. The explanation that ex-pats can retire there on meager pensions is belied by the fact that almost all of them are single men; obviously, Sex tourism plays an important role. For example, I was walking through an alley in Vietnam lined with "nail salons" to either side; an attractive young girl was handing out fliers to passers-by when a rather greasy old Westerner ahead of me, American by his accent, reached up and caressed her under the chin, whispering, "well, you're a cute one, aren't you?" There was no question of the man's intentions, and the girl knew too, leading him inside, presumably to have his “nails done.” The visceral reaction I felt caused me to physically recoil in revulsion. I just don't like meeting Americans who live somewhere else for no good reason.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-21_746_expatriates.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-21_746_expatriates.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Expatriates, ex-pats, expats, humor, politics no Sat, 14 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy How come American foreign policy is even more confused and obtuse than American domestic policy? It's because foreign actors can participate in American politics via campaign donations, along with a sympathetic entrenched bureaucracy. For example, a nation, Iran, would like to develop nuclear power but America says "no," not based upon some kind of strategic goal or desire for dominance, but because some part of the ruling aristocracy sees Iran as a threat to Israel. The people of the U.S. are not interventionists by nature, they need to be propagandized to intervene, and even that doesn't last long; yet an entire nation is beholden and in the grips of a small powerful foreign elite. International globalist corporations are a more existential threat because their goals often erode the very foundation of a nation's sovereignty: trade deals like the currently scuttled TPP would allow corporations to co-op the economic might of the world to penalize a small nation's parochial goals, like cigarette companies collecting monetary damages from Australia for their anti-smoking campaign that depresses sales. “Free” Trade is how these corporations dictate where people work and how much they earn, while the stockholders reap the financial benefits and the host nations suffer the social consequences. America's foreign policy isn't its own because it's been captured by foreigners.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-20_745_captured_foreign_policy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-20_745_captured_foreign_policy.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash foreign policy, globalist, corporations, TPP, humor, politics no Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The word “hate” has new meaning inside politics; a verbal Molotov-cocktail hurled to burn down any discussion and put the accusers in control: “hate” speech is any speech they don't like, “hate” groups are any organization they don't like, “hate” crime is paramount to all other crime because it is so hateful. Yet hate still retains the essence of the old definition: others wishing ill on their enemies; that one is loud and clear when applied to how these people view America; and we're not talking foreigners; these are American America-haters, and there's a lot of them. They hate traditional American values like liberty, guns & God. They hate American foreign policy that sides with Israel, and American economics embodied in Capitalism. They hate White men, and they hate Baby-Boomers. They hate single-family homes with manicured lawns, and they hate large gas-powered automobiles; They hate Confederate statues, and Thomas Jefferson & even George Washington. These people wish ill on all things traditionally American. How did such hateful people get in charge of what gets called “hate”?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-20_744_america-haters.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-20_744_america-haters.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash hate, hateful, America-Haters, humor, politics no Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The National Guard is the original State-based militia, controlled by the governor. People don't join the National Guard for the money; that's a good thing, it means the enlistees are doing it out of a sense of patriotism, or at least that's a large component of their decision. Mostly, the National Guard operates on American soil because the Posse Comitatus Act prevents domestic federal troop deployment. Even though the National Guard is technically a military force, it's primarily used for emergencies: natural catastrophes, local unrest and reconstruction. They are expected to protect other people's families like they want their own families to be protected, and the National Guard will shoot looters. The National Guard can be invoked as an auxiliary arm of the federal military when necessary but, historically, that is very uncommon because public servants like firefighters and police tend to join. Unfortunately, whole police and fire departments were stripped of their personnel when Bush, Jr. activated them to fight in the Iraq war. Certainly, that's not what the volunteers had in mind when they joined. In fact, during the time Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans, 40% of Louisiana's National Guard were deployed to foreign lands while their own hometowns flooded. This is the clearest example of an abuse of the National Guard.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-19_743_national_guard.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-19_743_national_guard.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash National Guard, humor, politics no Sun, 08 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy America's armed forces are 3rd in size in the world, about half of China's military, but size doesn't matter in modern warfare. America spends 17% of its GNP, almost a trillion dollars a year, on its military; no other nation even gets close, and the American Military-Industrial Complex is as vast as it is lethal. There are popular videos on YouTube that hypothetically pit the U.S. against other nations, and of course, it's always a walkover. Strategically, America has simultaneous access to both both oceans, and all 10 superaircraft carriers. What other secret weapons systems there are in space or hidden laboratories are topics of speculation. Heaven forbid another worldwide conflagration occurs so that entire nations are mobilized, but if it does, the U.S. has at least half the nation still clutching their guns, praying, and saluting the flag; plus now women would be included, so the number would approach 100 million effective combatants. Even the whole rest of the world wouldn't be able to raise an effective fighting force against those kind of numbers. Western Europeans are long past having the stomach for war; Asia, India, and Eastern Europe could draft, but Africa, South/Central America, and anyplace else would be problematic. If blowing up the world ever seems like a good idea, bet on America to be left standing on the cinder.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-19_742_america_vs_the_world.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-19_742_america_vs_the_world.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash military, world war, humor, politics no Fri, 06 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There's a lot of military fetishing in America but it's just a job. There's nothing special about people who become soldiers: they aren't stronger, they aren't braver, they aren't more patriotic, they don't deserve special recognition and respect any more than other jobs; but for a nation based on liberty, using a draft to force people into killing other people and potentially being killed, special treatment was part of the deal. However, now there is no draft, people make their own choice to join the military, and the rewards are commensurate enough without additional societal advantages. Those are mainly a holdover from the obligations created by multiple world wars in the last Century, and will probably eventually evaporate from an all-volunteer army. But there's more to consider about the job of soldiering besides the obvious protection benefit; society gains in a subtle way from having robust and organized military jobs because for a lot of recruits, it's where they learn to take responsibility for their actions, learn to take instruction, learn a skill, learn self-sufficiency, and learn leadership. The military has a from those according to their ability to those according to their need sacrifice ethos; and soldiering is the very definition of a leadership hierarchy with unquestioned obeyance; making it ironic that this totalitarian Marxist institution is where so many people learn the essentials of liberty.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-18_741_soldiering_is_a_job.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-18_741_soldiering_is_a_job.mp3 2:26 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash military, politics, humor no Wed, 04 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The U.S. military has approximately 1.3 million active-duty troops, and another 865,000 Reserves; one of the largest fighting forces in the world, having 200,000 troops deployed in 170 nations. They are 10% of the nation's voters, but are not a reflection of the population as a whole: 17% of the U.S. population is Black but they compose 27% of the military, probably because they have fewer opportunities than Whites; and women are less than 14% of the military but are more than half the population, probably because they have more opportunities than men. Most important: members of the military, past and presents, tend to be more patriotic; over half vote Republican, and less than 10% are Democrats. In this age of diversity, to counteract the voting disparity, there are calls by Democrats to institute a draft, forcing inducties to be more racially and gender representative of America. Unless the military gets larger, which few want, a draft would limit opportunity for men, and Black men in particular. As for women, who are at a biological disadvantage for combat service, highly qualified men would presumably be supplanted by soldiers less qualified physically, but more Politically Correct. Political Correctness has never won any wars, but it seems likely it could lose some.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-18_740_no_military_draft.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-18_740_no_military_draft.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash military, draft, humor, politics no Mon, 02 Mar 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy “America First” is cheerleading for nationalism; the concept that America must serve the needs of its own citizens and country before considering what other nations and peoples want. To generations of Americans raised with the concept of liberty: making decisions for yourself and reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of your own actions, nationalism makes logical sense, but it's in direct conflict with re-emerging Marxist ideology which puts needs first, a complete reversal of responsibility, and incompatible with nationalism and liberty. Besides the Marxists, cosmopolitanism, also called globalism, the opposite of nationalism, has the Stateless, loyalty-free international corporations as allies because nationalists tend to protect their Markets as a means of protecting their workers, which negatively affects a corporation's bottom line. Unfortunately, The Left, Marxists in fact even if they deny the term, uses linguistics as a weapon of confusion, and have successful tainted the word “nationalism,” and by extension, liberty itself. They associate nationalism with conflicts of the past, conflating a nation's pride and independence with its inclination to go to war. Keep making this reference long enough and adamantly enough, and it becomes accepted fact, an effective tactic for disavowing national borders, wealth accumulation, and exceptionalism; all things Marxists work against. Obviously, the argument used against nationalism is primarily a Trojan Horse for Marxism.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-17_739_nationalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-17_739_nationalism.mp3 2:49 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash nationalism, politics, humor no Sat, 29 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Patriotic symbols & pageantry are from a time gone by, naturally appealing to conservatives, but in a sophisticated and interconnected world they seem quaint and anachronistic; in fact, patriotism itself is being challenged. Flags are complex symbols, and to most children, saying the Pledge of Allegiance is little more than chanting, militaristic even, especially when accompanied by a gesture of some kind: salute or hand-over-heart. It's obviously a form of brainwashing, one we as a unified nation were willing, even eager, to endue, but what real purpose does it serve other than conditioning citizens to forced compliance by the State. Even discussing the Pledge of Allegiance is a contentious topic, rife for demagoguery from The Right. In the past, chanting the pledge before school started was mainstream but public sentiment is beginning to turn against it, primarily fueled by the grievance culture that condemns America's past, including the sentimentality expressed in the pledge: flag, god, liberty. What the pledge did was indoctrinate these concepts into the whole populace so that everyone understood what was important in America, but there is a cultural war going on where those things are now associated with only one side. Pledging as a way to control the narrative has lost its effectiveness.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-17_738_pledge_of_allegiance.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-17_738_pledge_of_allegiance.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Pledge of Allegiance, humor, politics no Thu, 27 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Once upon a time, for about 50 years really, from the end of WW2 to the beginning of the new millennium, Americans, the ones that felt comfortable in America anyway, worshiped at the alter of the 4-Gs: God, guns, gas & GIs. In fact, that’s the calling card of Conservatives today, most of whom remember those days with a feeling of nostalgia. Unfortunately, the 4-Gs were overthrown during the 1960s, the last time America had the kind of upheaval it’s having today, but they stil lingered. However, in this virtual civil war, the only people still carrying the 4-Gs banner are aging beyond relevance. God may hang around; he always does but he won’t be telling presidents what to do in their prayers anymore. Guns have become anathema; like a MAGA hat that can fight back. Cars are electric, and gasoline is fracked. The draft is gone, and GIs with it; today’s soldiers are mercenaries held in check primarily because they’re brainwashed to be so. Here's hoping that something like the 4-Gs will be embraced by modern culture, but that seems unlikely; whatever emerges in this new upheaval will probably completely abandon the 4-Gs, and make liberty a casualty as well.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-17_737_god__guns__gas__gis.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-17_737_god__guns__gas__gis.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash God, guns, gas, GIs, humor, politics no Tue, 25 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Science is difficult to understand so reviewing the concepts is extra important: Complex Systems are too complex to predict, and life is complex. Every pseudo-intellectual talks about Chaos Theory & Quantum physics but few know what they're talking about. If you think about it, black swans aren't that uncommon. TED Talks is snob appeal for science. The motive for getting females into STEM is pure elitism; ask any garbage man. Engineers are little more than chattel in a globalized world. Relativity is misunderstood, relatively speaking. TV on Alpha Centuri ain't what you'd think. Any space missions of the future will involve corporations and trust fund babies. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-17_736_science_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-17_736_science_concepts.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash science, humor, politics no Sun, 23 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Apparently, people in government don't watch popular movies; someone should explain to them that we've got generations of kids raised on spaceships, aliens & blasters. When people think about space, it's space ships that carry astronauts, not satellites, and it's Star Wars, not earth bores. Given that man landed on the moon 50 years ago, Buck Rogers prospects seemed like a sure bet, but it hasn't quite worked out that way. NASA canceled the Return To The Moon initiative and replaced it with “Earth” missions, ostensibly to study the earth from space “to provide societal benefits and strengthen our nation.” Supposedly, they're still thinking about a Mars missions in the 2030s, but until then, there's some satellites and another telescope... Ho-hum. Since government has abdicated its role, many private ventures have rushed to fill in the void: billionaire Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic offers a $250,000 space flight; billionaire Jeff Bezo's Blue Origin's is using a traditional capsule on a rocket approach; Soyuz-using Space Adventures & Roscosmos have accommodated the only 7 space tourists so far, who paid $20-50 million each, the last in 2009; there's also KosmoKurs, who got the contract to replace the Soyuz rockets, partnering with space hotel builder Aiom Space, offer a trip at $10 million per per occupant; and billionaire Elon Musk's SpaceX has been getting the lion's share of news coverage with their reusable, self-landing boosters, and plan to go back to the moon because somebody has to...   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-17_735_space_missions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-10-17_735_space_missions.mp3 2:48 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash SpaceX, space, missions, politics, humor no Fri, 21 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The star, Alpha Centauri, is 4.3 light years away: could we watch an Alpha Centurian TV show that started 4 years ago? Yes, but Alpha Centauri is moving towards the earth at 46,000 miles an hour, so the TV show would be fast forwarding, just like if Alpha Centauri was moving away from the earth, the show would be playing in slow motion. However, if a spaceship from Earth was passing Alpha Centuri 4 light years away, it could watch the show at the correct speed. What if a spaceship from Earth was traveling away from Earth at lightspeed, and it was 4 light years away, could it watch an Earthling TV show that started 4 years ago? No, because the signal wouldn't be able to catch up. It get's weirder. What if a spaceship was traveling at lightspeed and the astronaut was trying to watch a movie playing inside the ship? If the monitor was facing forward, the light from the screen would never change because the astronaut was traveling along with it, and if the screen were facing towards the back, the astronaut wouldn't see anything because the light would skip right past him. Now consider that everything else is moving too: Earth, Galaxies, the universe; it's remarkable you can watch Alpha Centurian TV at all.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-21_734_alpha_centurian_tv.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-21_734_alpha_centurian_tv.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash lightspeed, light speed, humor, politics no Wed, 19 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Everybody agrees that someone on an asteroid 1 light-year from earth could watch through their telescope what you ate for breakfast a year ago but they can't agree how long it took for you to eat it?There seem to be a lot of intelligent people who misunderstand Einstein's Theory of Relativity, and think time actually slows down; that satellites & astronauts age slower when they are in space; even people is fast airplanes flying to London get to take a few nanoseconds off their age. If that was true, the earth is traveling at 67,000 mph around the Sun, so you're a little younger still; even more because the galaxy is moving at 1.3 million mph. If there was time dilation, some is happening right now and you're a whole lot younger than you think you are. That's ridiculous as it seems: time does not slow down any more than it speeds up, it only seems to relative to a viewer that is traveling at different speeds and different directions because light is unidirectional and travels at a constant speed. Here's a way to check: consider a bullet whizzing past, and that the bullet shoots two rays of light, one back and one forward along its path. The bullet is traveling fast enough that it would dilate time but add together the times each ray was received at either end of the path, and the total will be the same time it takes for a single ray of light shot from one receiver to the next. Some physicists have probably already done this experiment but can't get anyone to read their paper. What we need is a Theory of Realitivity.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-21_733_relativity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-21_733_relativity.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash relativity, humor, politics no Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Does a First World society need engineers? Ambitious nations sure think so: looking at engineering students training in American universities, you find a large proportion of them are foreign nationals, tuition paid for by their home governments so they can return to make their own nations better. However, in the U.S., careers in engineering, which used to be attractive, are not so much anymore. Engineering graduates peaked at 80,000 in the 1980's then declined to 65,000; this in the face of an increasing population and overwhelming technological needs. Compare that to China's 3.7 million engineering students. The first reason is: who wants to go to school for something so difficult, for little prestige and relatively low pay? Anyone intelligent enough for engineering would be better personally served by going into something else: medicine, law, or banking. Another, more insidious, reason fewer and fewer students are choosing engineering is globalization, specifically H1B visas that lower the pay and take the opportunities. Potential employers are essentially in-country off-shoring of engineering, making American engineers the equivalent of textile or auto workers. Self-interestedly, the Free Marketeers dismiss the decimation of our nation's brain trust with the same tired Market Forces reassurances. These are the people who make money when other nations are doing better at America's expense. The brutal fact is that engineers are no more fungible than military or police; you better have them when you need them.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-20_732_engineers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-20_732_engineers.mp3 2:52 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash engineers, engineering, humor, politics no Sat, 15 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Careers involving Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics, STEM, attract men; women too but in much smaller numbers. The worry over the participation of women in STEM is epitomized by engineering, which has a high of 22% of female chemical engineers and a low of 8% for mechanicals. Because of this unbalance in gender representation, the inevitable victimhood & equality siren is constantly blaring to “get more girls into STEM.” A recent headline read, "6.7% of women graduate with STEM degrees," which seems alarming, but take a closer look. First, the percentage of men who graduate STEM are only double that, and the starting number is important: 58% of undergraduate college students are women; even worse, two-thirds of all graduate students are women. Of that reduced participation by men, only 17% go into STEM. Worldwide, 16% of women go into STEM, which means the difference in gender STEM participation is only in the U.S. The reason is obvious: any woman smart enough to get through STEM in America, instead goes into Law & Medicine, exemplified by the fact that 60% of Law and medical students are women, and that's with gender-balancing, otherwise it would be even lower male representation. In comparison, less than 1% are women in the fields of trash collection, masonry & septic tank servicing. There's also a dearth of women construction workers, mechanics & heavy equipment operators, but since those fields aren't prestigious, there's no equivalent Equality uproar, even though those jobs can pay the same as STEM.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-20_731_female_stem.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-20_731_female_stem.mp3 3:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash STEM, engineering, humor, politics no Thu, 13 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy TED Talks, short for Technology, Entertainment & Design, are a phenomenon not unlike the New Age craze, but subtler about their indoctrination. They are incredibly popular and usually include pre & post events like a night-time run, and champagne party. They profess to be exemplary speakers from their highfalutin, specialized fields of study, or perhaps meta-humans passing their wisdom onto the vestige intelligence of the residual human species, but the reality is more a conflagration of self-congratulation, hero worship, and sanctimonious posturing. It's not a coincidence that the audience is almost entirely made up of a single political party. The TED speakers probably consider themselves edgy, at least that's what you'd think by how they dress, and their constant cultural references are the height of cosmopolitan name-dropping, but the Political Correctness observed at these events in gestapo-like, and the uniformity of thought reminiscent of a cult. To make matters worse, there is a kind of TED event, called TEDx, where the speakers pay to be there, taking advantage of a captive audience who are not aware they are being sold snake oil. TED Talks are what happens when science tries to be popular.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-19_730_ted_talks.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-19_730_ted_talks.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash TED, TEDx, humor, politics no Tue, 11 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The “Black Swan” theory of events correctly points out that just because a thing has never happened does not mean it cannot happen, even though people often make that assumption when doing predictions, and even if predictors had postulated that such events could happen, since they have not yet ever occurred, their probability cannot be measured, which means that any predictions made without considering them are misleading at best, and dishonest at worst. As insightful as this explanation seems, what really explains Black Swans is actually much more pedestrian. What's really going on is that there are an infinite number of possibilities with probabilities of occurring so small as to be negligible, impossible really, but not zero. Add enough of these non-zero possibilities together and there becomes a significant probability that one of them will happen. Because Black Swan seems so elegant yet so inscrutable, it's often cynically invoked in combination with the possibly of catastrophic consequences as a justification for action on otherwise non-actionable possibilities; for example, an asteroid may hit earth and since that is a catastrophe of immense proportions, we must plan and prepare as if that event will occur. Climate Change hysteria is the ultimate purveyor of this kind of logic. Of course, as with any Complex System, the correct strategy is reactive rather than proactive, but fear-mongering for political reasons overrides conscientious science; just wait for the Black Swans to show up before getting your camera.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-19_729_black_swan.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-19_729_black_swan.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Black Swan, humor, politics no Sun, 09 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy It's easy to confuse Chaos Theory with Quantum physics because the concept is the same but Chaos Theory predicts things that will happen while Quantum physics suggests things that can happen. They are both based on probabilities but Chaos Theory is deterministic, meaning that with given inputs, you know the time, place and size of the outputs. For example, the dynamics of steam is chaotic but it's predictable: know the volume and temperature, and the pressure can be calculated; yet what's really happening is that untold molecules are bouncing around randomly in a complex environment, no way to predict where any single one will go, but how all will go is predictable. As a comparison: there's no place for Star Trek-like transporters in Chaos Theory because it's not predictable, but Quantum physics gots it covered... Almost. Quantum physics can only predict one out of two things: when but not where or where but not when; for example, you can say Dr. Spock is going to materialize in a certain place but you can't say when. This has got a lot of scientists scratching their heads and scribbling arcane math without much success, but when we know more how to control Quantum physics, you may be transportering soon, we just don't know where.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-18_728_chaos_theory__quantum_physics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-18_728_chaos_theory__quantum_physics.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Chaos Theory, Quantum Physics, humor, politics no Fri, 07 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Newtonian physics is rather simple: action equals reaction; good for building cars and civilizations, but most of nature is incomprehensively complex, so that the only way humans can model them is with statistics, which is the probability that an event will occur times uncountable events. Though there are some complex systems that can be controlled, the vast majority cannot, and no Top Down approach can ever manage them: too many variables to determine the outcome, and it requires perfect knowledge as well as being able to predict the future. Simple examples of Complex Systems in life are flocking birds, or schools of fish, and other events that look like there's a Grand Design but in reality are the combination of finely granulated autonomous decisions of each of the members. No master force can predict what those fish are going to do, it's better to set back and wait for the time they come under your boat to fish. This simple solution of observe and wait applied to the complexity problem was proposed for economic markets by Adam Smith, followed by social philosopher Friedrich Hayek, as a basis of his political theory. Computer Scientists adopted this idea with Object Oriented programming, and Artificial Intelligence is totally based on the concept of taking a wait-and-see approach, reactionary rather than proactive; adjust rather than try to control; which may seem troubling to some personalities but it's really the only logical way to live a complex life.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-18_727_complex_systems.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-18_727_complex_systems.mp3 2:39 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash complex systems, humor, politics no Wed, 05 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Healthcare is a big topic; let's review the sliver of it we've covered: Americans are going to have to get used to socialized healthcare because it's different than what they have now. Healthcare isn't a traditional Market; you can't just shop around. There's no such thing as healthcare centered on the patient because it has to serve all patients equally. The so-called Opioid Crisis is really a crisis of fear-mongering. Antibiotic resistance would have happened anyway; no need to blame the patient. You are your body chemistry. If it wasn't for sociopathic behavior, there'd be no behavior at all. Alternative medicine is actually an oxymoron because it's not medicine. Having the compassion to let a person die naturally is greater than any kind of altruism. Abortion has lots of easy questions but no easy answers. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-17_726_healthcare_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-17_726_healthcare_concepts.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash healthcare, humor, politics no Mon, 03 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Pontificating on abortion has never changed anyone's mind. Given that there doesn't seem to be any compromise, the solution, if there is one, can only be determined by philosophy, specifically Socratic questioning that might lead us to the answer. For example, if a fetus could be transplanted into an artificial womb, is that okay? Should it be a forced transfer? Can all mother's do it? Who pays for that? We've already determined that any amount of money will be spent to keep a premature baby alive, so $10 million forced transplants of unwanted fetuses may be in our future? The issue of technology and abortion gets even thornier. There's eventually going to be cloning; are they the same as conjugal babies? What if it was used on people without them knowing it, is that rape? Does the clone have to be raised to term? Cloning allows males to produce offspring; what are the effects of that? Can cloning be outlawed? If one is made illegally, can it be aborted? If you thought the abortion issue was intractable now, just wait for science to stick its finger in. That's why The Courts decide these things, not amateur moralists.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-17_725_abortion_questions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-17_725_abortion_questions.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash abortion, clones, humor, politics no Sat, 01 Feb 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Euthanasia is allowing people to die, or even commit suicide, sometimes with a doctor's help, because the person chooses that over a lingering or painful death. Euthanasia is a liberty question because the desire to die comes from the patient, however, if the decision is to let a person, particularly a deformed newborn or someone who is brain dead, die naturally, that is compassionate death. Compassion is subjective, and easily veers into moral philosophy; for example, if a brain dead person is allowed to die so that their organ's can be harvested, is that more or less compassionate? Babies and compassionate death generate the most angst. There's a famous case in England where a doctor, who is one of the world’s specialists, thought a baby would be harmed by further treatment, and was allowing it to die. A judge was asked to decide but how is a judge more qualified in this matter than a doctor? The judge judicially decided it was up to the doctor. Making the decision even more controversial, Italy offered to take the baby and provide treatment. It caused an uproar among a lot of religious people, but was the baby left in God's hands by not being treated, or by a futile treatment, and which is more compassionate, or are neither?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-17_724_compassionate_death.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-17_724_compassionate_death.mp3 2:15 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash compassionate death, euthanasia, humor, politics no Thu, 30 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Modern medicine is intimidating to most people: the doctors, the facilities, the treatments, the costs. Plus, patients have almost no control over any of it, rising their anxiety level even higher. One of the ways to exert control over your own life is to make your goals subjective, and uniqueness is sought after because it gives control through obscure knowledge that only you know. Medicine is especially vulnerable to these lures because the reality is that placebo, getting fooled into thinking a treatment is helping you when it's actually a scam, is the most effective part of healthcare; professional and quackery. Chiropractic, naturopathy, homeopathy, acupuncture, aroma therapy, yoga, diet, crystals, massage, positive thinking; all so-called Alternative Medicine depends on the placebo effect and lessened anxiety: how could something you dig out of your backyard hurt you, and massages feel good no matter what. There's usually some smidgen of an idea behind all of these poppycock treatments but it's far-outweighed by the lack of evidence for them, and the fact that someone can receive a Doctor of Natural Medicine borders on malpractice. Professional, accredited, liability-insured medicine is called Evidence-based, but that's a misnomer too; often the evidence is fleeting at best with negative results ignored. Justifying $100K therapies that only provide a minimal chance of improvement would never happen outside of the natural monopoly of medicine where you are literally going to die otherwise. Medicine makes liars out of everybody.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-16_723_alternative_medicine.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-16_723_alternative_medicine.mp3 2:44 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash alternative medicine, humor, politics no Tue, 28 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Humans are inherently sociopathic, meaning they measure the alternatives and choose to act based on a rational decision-making process, but often what can be done and what should be done cross over the lines of courtesy & trust, the oil that lets society function. In a person-to-person contact, social pressures act to damper sociopathic excesses, but the Internet is free of such restrictions, and Social Media has enabled and exacerbated sociopathological behaviors because it lacks negative feedback: Instagram, for example, provides a positive feedback loop for narcissism & self-absorption. Trolls are sadists, and the people that allow themselves to be trolled are masochists. Facebook is filled with textbook examples of Borderline personalities, and Fake News makes it difficult to tell paranoia from fact. Sociopathic feelings & motivations, which would normally be suppressed in a civil society, are instead exaggerated in Social Media, especially when the Clicks that result are worth something to the person doing the instigating; provocateurs literally make their living by preying on the weaknesses of people. It's relatively easy to radicalize anyone if they are ensconced in a bubble where everyone else thinks the same thing. Our society that champions liberty & Free Speech is especially vulnerable to sociopaths. We don't penalize people for how they made their money, and we don't legally require them to have a value system that doesn't impinge on the Rights of others. In fact, to do anything to them is to betray all we say we believe in. The only solutions are to inure online courtesy in the young, and make it easy to ignore the worst of us.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-16_722_sociopathic_behavior.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-16_722_sociopathic_behavior.mp3 2:43 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sociopathy, humor, politics no Sun, 26 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The chemistry going on inside your body controls who you are more than anything else. Most people know that testosterone is one of the primary dictates of men's lives, but they don't know about an even more influential hormone, cortisol. When a person is stressed, their body releases cortisol. This is a primordially survival mechanism, and affects everything: decreased immune system, cell aging, Alzheimer's, obesity, heart disease, cancer, mental illness, diabetes, depression, impaired learning, blood pressure; all to put the body into fight-or-flight response. It saves you in the instant but is deadly if chronically secreted over a lifetime. Unfortunately for men, the most common cause of cortisol is due to subjugation in a male dominance hierarchy; low-status male gorillas never become silverbacks and die early. On the flip side of body chemistry, positive emotions are caused by the neurotransmitters, dopamine & serotonin. Dopamine is released during pursuit of goals, a great motivational power. Any goal works to release dopamine, which is why games are popular because games, especially immersive videogames, establish their own frame of reference, increasing relative status. Stories, like books & movies, work in a similar way by putting you in the role of the hero, increasing perceived status, which triggers dopamine, increases serotonin, and decreases cortisol; a win for your body all around. Essentially, you aren't what you eat but you are what you secrete.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-15_721_body_chemistry.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-15_721_body_chemistry.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash cortisol, dopamine, serotonin, body chemistry, humor, politics no Fri, 24 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Virtually all antibiotics have some strain of bacteria that is resistant to them. The theory goes that these resistant strains emerged when people did not take a full course of antibiotics, so blame the patient. If the not-full-course canard is true, antibiotic resistance would come from people who don't have access to cheap antibiotics so they only use 1 or 2 tablets until their symptoms get bearable and they stop because can't they can't afford anymore. If they had a complete course, 12 tablets, they would take them. Nations with socialized medicine have an easy solution: make antibiotics inexpensive and easily available. As an example: a course of Azithromycin in the U.S. costs about $160 and requires a doctor's prescription, but the equivalent in Peru is $1 and is sold over the counter at pharmacies. There's also another explanation: antibiotic resistance is a statistical observation and could simply be an example of confusing correlation with causation: it seems likely that resistant strains of bacteria have always existed, and with the increasing interactions of people from around the world, they have spread, so antibiotic resistance bacteria would emerge regardless of how many pills are consumed. There is also the charge that antibiotics are overused, especially if they bring up how stupid people don't know antibiotics don't work on viruses even though doctors also can't tell without testing, but this is perhaps a suspicious facade for medical activism: rich nations who use antibiotics are oppressing poor nations that don't by creating resistant strains. It's often difficult to separate medicine from politics, and antibiotic resistance is one of those.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-15_720_antibiotic_resistance.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-15_720_antibiotic_resistance.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash antibiotic resistance, humor, politics no Wed, 22 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy People use drugs for the same reason they drink alcohol, to reduce anxiety, which is an evolutionary motivation. The best drugs act on the opioid receptors of the brain; a terrific combination of euphoria and pain relief. Natural opiates like morphine, heroin & codine, come from the poppy plant, and they've been used for millennia, both recreationally and medicinally; in fact, morphine is named after Morpheus, the Greek god of dream. Opium is so desirable, wars were fought over it, and it was legal in America until the 20th Century. There are also synthetic narcotics, called opioids, like methadone, oxycodone & fentanyl. These words have all entered the political lexicon of fear and apprehension: the so-called Opioid & Prescription Drug Crises. The Opioid Crisis is conflated with prescription drugs because pharmacies are something everyone is familiar with while most people have no contact with the criminal underworld. There's nothing wrong with the prescription process, that's very secure, but misleadingly, reported opioid abuse includes the vast amount of illegal drugs in with prescription abuse. This leads to ridiculous proposed solutions like halving the number of legally-manufactured pills; then why not a quarter? Why make any of these drugs at all? It's the same inane pretext used in anti-gun arguments. Luckily, gun owners are protected by the Constitution; unfortunately, people who need pain medication are not.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-14_719_opioid_crisis.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-14_719_opioid_crisis.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash opioid, prescription drugs, crises, humor, politics no Mon, 20 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Doctors are glorified mechanics who work retail, and they're definitely not patient centric; it's all about what's convenient for the hospital staff, specifically doctors and to a lesser extent, nurses. Egregious examples of this lack of patient consideration include: group rooms so that no one sleeps, blood draws and IVs at all hours, inefficient discharges, repeated questioning, and no notification of costs nor permission to incur those costs. The reality is, how could it be any different? Healthcare operates under best practices, which means doing the accepted procedures for everyone, regardless; very similar to the concept of equality under the law. In fact, medicine is a one-size-fits-all profession because who wants to be treated worse than everyone else, but given the chance, everyone would want to be treated better. This uniform process implementation conflicts with the mystical concept that healthcare centers around the patient. Hospital brochures and advertisements stress how they give the patient control over their treatment, but without specifics about what that means, because there is nothing: patients are addressed the same, put in the same queues, and treated the same no matter who or where they are. A rotating hospital staff and basic human self-centeredness ensures it can be no other way: Mr. Smith is on the Stroke floor, that's all the staff needs to know. Considering the discomfort, anxiety, exhaustion and cognitive impairment of patients, plus distraught & unreasonable family members, the process has to be strictly assembly-line: next.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-14_718_patient_centric.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-14_718_patient_centric.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash patient centric, healthcare, humor, politics no Sat, 18 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Advocates for a purely Market-driven approach to healthcare seem not to understand its monopolistic nature. Lasik is an example of the kind of heathcare that can be marketized, along with other elective, non-life-threatening procedures like breast augmentation, but those are the exceptions; most procedures require highly sophisticated decisions but most people don't have enough knowledge to know what decisions to make, and even if they do, they're not going to compromise on their health. Suppose you're experiencing some symptoms so you Google around looking for the diagnosis that fits your imagination, and find one: cholecystitis. (This is a super common malady so if anything could be marketized, it could.) Assuming the pain is bearable while you're researching, you've got to decided whether to get an MRCP for further diagnosis, or perhaps an ERCP, or maybe just have a cholecystectomy, maybe via laproscopy. What CBC value would prompt you to go with an MRCP first? Will you be outpatient, and if so, will you be flying to your cheapest surgeon or driving yourself? Unfortunately, you've probably got a bit of Altered Mental Status from your illness so your cognitive abilities may be impaired, and BTW, you could die, but not for a while. Next on the possible list of marketable medicine is gallbladder or peptic ulcer surgery, but those things stretch the envelope of what intelligent people can understand, let alone your elderly mother. You might be able to make it work for you but when you have icteric eyes, episodic pain, and the threat of death, could you negotiate the deals? Let's say you don't use Google, you spring for a real doctor. Imagine it's a drive-through franchise with acceptable prices, but of course, it's market-driven, so it's their own brand of boutique medicine, and they only offer the profitable stuff; or maybe you could hire a medicine broker who gets a cut for finding the cheapest surgeon, but that doesn't sound like a very good plan.     Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-13_717_shopping_for_healthcare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-13_717_shopping_for_healthcare.mp3 3:09 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialized, medicine, healthcare, politics, humor no Thu, 16 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy While I was training as a doctor in England, my wife and I were on their fully socialized healthcare system, the National Health Service, or NHS, where everyone's covered essentially for free. It was acceptable and got the job done but it was bare-bones, something many Americans would take some getting used to. An example of my own experience gives a feel: I received a yearly checkup card in the mail telling me when my appointment was, and I was assigned a clinic within walking distance, both extremely convenient. However, the building was a hundred year-old converted warehouse; the Waiting room was folding chairs; and there was no receptionist. When my number came up, I had to find my room through a labyrinth of halls. Once when I knocked on the door, the doctor inside said "come in," and when I opened the door, the previous patient was still getting dressed. There was no more waiting for service than I'd experienced in the U.S., perhaps less. The rooms had plenty of supplies but expensive technical devices, like an MRI, came to my clinic in a truck on Tuesdays and Wednesdays for scheduled appointments. All-in-all, we found it utilitarian and non-stressful, it was fast, there were definitely no pretensions, and 60% of Britains prefer to use it. The rest of the British population uses American-style private medical care based on insurance, but the costs are kept in check because the alternative is free. For example, my wife needed a small operation on her foot and was scheduled three days later at a private surgeon's office on the second floor of the public swimming pool; she was in and out in an hour, and it was extremely cheap by American standards. I consider the British healthcare system to be the best in the world.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-13_716_using_socialized_healthcare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-13_716_using_socialized_healthcare.mp3 2:46 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialized, healthcare, politics, humor no Tue, 14 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There's a lot to review about Marxism: Evolution favors Marxism. Karl Marx was a philosophical technician, not a philosopher. The underlying concept of Marxism: from those according to their ability, to those according to their need, has been around for millennia. FDR saved Capitalism by embracing some socialism but he wasn't a Marxist. Marxism went underground when the Soviet Union fell but it's back with a vengeance now. Post Modernism & Cultural Marxism are the newest tactics for reversing the status quo. Millennials infatuation with Marxism is a combination of selfishness & ignorance. The Chinese call American social hypocrisy the “White Left.” Marxist philosophy is separate from, and does not depend on, implementation. Marxism prevails because no counter-measures were taken to stop it. Marxism will always fail because it competes against basic human nature. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-12_715_marxism_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-12_715_marxism_concepts.mp3 2:43 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Marxism, humor, politics no Sun, 12 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Marxism is attractive to at least half the population, the half whose life is improved by forced sharing with the other, more successful, half. Plus, the vision Marx expresses is very similar to the afterlife described in Christianity which shares the age-old philosophy of: from those according to their ability, to those according to their need. This tenet also reverses control: those without can make demands on those who have. Power & riches without effort; no wonder Marxism spreads so easily. In reality, just like the Roman Empire continued as long as they conquered and took what they wanted; Marxism can only continue as long as there is extra capacity. Capitalism works because it relies on the base human motivations of greed, avarice & control: a rising tide lifts all boats is their favorite metaphor, and it's true, but it's also in a negative feedback loop with the equally powerful base human motivations of envy, jealously & resentment; so Capitalism saw-tooths around some mutually acceptable compromise of feelings, and is relatively stable. Contrarily, Marxism will always fail because it depends on the passive human motivations of altruism, egalitarianism & sacrifice. Unfortunately, a person can always express more and more of these attributes in a positive feedback loop headed for self-destruction. This is not even considering the totalitarian aspect of Marxism that inevitably occurs when a base-emotion individual exploits the passive-emotion individuals. Nothing can stop either of these two things from eventually happening.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-12_714_marxism_will_always_fail.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-12_714_marxism_will_always_fail.mp3 2:58 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Marxism, Capitalism, politics, humor no Fri, 10 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Propaganda works... Bigtime. Propaganda can make masses of people believe a person rose from the dead or ride a flying horse. It doesn't make any difference if the idea is completely illogical or refuted by facts, keep saying that the aliens on the comet are coming to take you, and without rebuttal, people will drink the Kool-Aid. Our news sources have been completely compromised; the private companies who have control over disseminating information are infiltrated from the highest to the lowest levels. We can no longer believe what we're told, and have difficulty even determining what we can believe: online definitions change, search results are modified, knowledgeable personalities are banned, videos are edited; everything is suspect. Why? Ideology, specifically Marxist ideology. Marxism is the concept of Equality: from those according to their ability, to those according to their need. Marxists are everywhere: the Feminist movement is Marxist, Black Lives Matter is Marxist, Identity Politics is Marxist, Environmentalism is Marxist, the UN is Marxist, etc. These people have taken control of the propaganda network, and collude to make the world Marxist. Equality is alluring and without a concerted effort to pushback and promote the American ideal of liberty in its stead, it will eventually win, for a while anyway.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-12_713_marxism_prevails.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-12_713_marxism_prevails.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Marxism, propaganda, humor, politics no Wed, 08 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Most people on The Left think Marxism is a taboo word, so deny that's what they are. However, when you compare the tenets of The Left: equality, justice, and democracy; those are the very foundations of Marxism: from those according to their ability, to those according to their need; the bourgeoisie are responsible to the proletariat for past injustices; and pure democracy. In response to this comparison, Leftists exclaim that since they don't want control of the factories, and people can own things, they can't be Marxists, but the tenets stand regardless of Karl Marx's naive proposed solutions.. The philosophy expressed by Marx is often conflated with his utopian implementation. Marx only suggested how his ideal world might operate: Workers would control the means of production is the most famous, but also citizen anarchy where no one is in charge and all decisions are made through democracy; and no one needs to own anything because everyone has everything through sharing. Communism is the direct descendant of Marxism but because of the frailties of human nature, Communism substitutes The State as controlling production and owning everything, and The State making all decisions rather than the citizens though the claim they are democratic because of compulsory voting, even if only one candidate is allowed to run. In a desperate attempt, Marxists look at these discrepancies and claim Communism isn't Marxism either; Marxism is their whatever their vision of utopia is.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-11_712_marxist_philosophy_vs_implementation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-11_712_marxist_philosophy_vs_implementation.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Marxism, Communism, politics, humor no Mon, 06 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The morphing of Western ideals into something alien and unrecognizable is primarily the result of women, minorities & weirdos attempting to gain power, and has caused some bewilderment in the people of formerly Marxist nations, like the Soviets and Chinese. In China, especially, they are greatly entertained by what they call baizuo, or “White Left.” The term originated online just before Trump's run for the U.S. presidency in a Chinese journal paper entitled, “The Fake Morality of the Western White Left,” but has since entered wide public discourse, and is fueled by the double standards of Western media and its biased reporting, specifically Identity Politics and how it treats Asians unfairly. The accepted perception of White Left is quite unflattering: those who are obsessed with equality in order to satisfy their own feeling of moral superiority, motivated from an ignorant and arrogant Western-centric worldview who pity the rest of the world and think they are saviors, combined with political opinions guided by emotions and a hypocritical show of selflessness and empathy. Obviously, the Chinese have nothing but disgust for America's Social Justice Warriors, and the ironic thing is, the Chinese Marxist ideals are the goal of these Western White Left Marxists.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-11_711_white_left.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-11_711_white_left.mp3 2:30 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash White Left, humor, politics no Sat, 04 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Marxism is not a new attraction: it finds acceptance among those whose expectations of their success in life collided with reality. In fact, from a purely practical, self-interested perspective, Marxism works to alleviate the envy of perhaps one generation, possibly two, before it begins its inevitable collapse due to going against human nature. If you are in that lucky first generation and are short-sighted or selfish enough to ignore the consequences then Marxism is quite appealing. Millennials, who's expectations were set by living with their Boomer parents, and are now living with 3 roommates sharing a cellphone plan, and working part-time as baristas if they even have a job, would probably see their lives materially improved under Equality. Those organic food-shopping, bike-riding, App-using, marriage-eschewing snowflakes don't care how much better off they are than people in India. When they lived at home, their parents covered healthcare, lodging, and college tuition. They used to drive their dad's Mercedes and now all they have is this stupid 1-speed bicycle. Disillusioned entitlement is being confused for oppression, and now in these Post Modern times, there are so many cultural oppressions to choose from that Marxism seems certain to get a 51% voting block eventually, with Millennials leading the way.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-10_710_millennials_infatuation_with_marxism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-10_710_millennials_infatuation_with_marxism.mp3 2:19 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Millennials, Marxism, humor, politics no Thu, 02 Jan 2020 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy In all fields, what used to be called Modern happened long ago, so what is happening now is called Post Modern, and this has happened to Marxism too. Marxism's basic tenet is Equality: from those according to their ability, to those according to their need, where class used to be the fulcrum; upper classes oppressing lower classes, usually measured by economic disparity. Unfortunately for Marxists, the initial authoritarian implementations didn't work out, so they now have a democracy fetish. However, there just aren't enough people oppressed by class for a majority, so rather than class, the so-called Cultural Marxists are attempting to accumulate votes based on other kinds of oppression: race, gender, religion; pitting Blacks against Whites, women against men, Muslims against Christians. Post Modernism's arsenal includes name-calling; the terms Nazi, Racist, Homophobic, Transphobic, etc., are indiscriminately hurled like mortars into public discourse. Another tactic is to make things subjective, thereby putting control into the hands of whoever claims it; the most obvious is Self-identifying, usually gender, but even race; you say you're a woman, you must be treated like a woman, including playing in women's sports, and the use of Women's bathrooms; anyone who disagrees is Transphobic. Another manifestation is the supposedly scientific Happiness literature used to support and justify the subjectivity of what makes people happy. Similar use of subjectivity is to claim that you find something offensive so it must be discontinued. There are also the imagined Micro-aggressions practiced by Whites against women and Blacks in their everyday speech and actions that only the receiver can recognize and therefore demand unilateral change. As a political strategy, the goal of Post Modernism & Cultural Marxism is to gain power through linguistics and subjectivity by exploiting the courtesy and passivity of the established order.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-10_709_post_modernism__cultural_marxism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-10_709_post_modernism__cultural_marxism.mp3 3:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Cultural Marxism, Post Modernism, humor, politics no Tue, 31 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy When the Soviet Union fell, everyone assumed Marxism was defeated. Yes, China was still around but they didn't seem threatening at the time and were dabbling in Capitalism anyway, and the few pockets of Marxism remaining were otherwise inconsequential. Unfortunately, nobody was looking inwardly because in retrospect, Marxism went nowhere, it just rebranded, went underground, and bided its time while working feverishly to entrench itself as the most important influence in America, and they've succeeded; what German Leftists strategized as, “the long march through the institutions” The Left has gained a great level of control in media, education, Tech, entertainment & government. The bastions of Marxist thought were and still are in the universities, and the University Presses disseminate and legitimize the new theories of Equality, Grievance Studies & Radical Feminism. They gained control of the media by dominating enrollment and the curriculums, and Affirmative Action injected them into business and entertainment. This has been going on for decades with hardly a mention from the established order, and anyone who did notice was ridiculed, called names, ostracized and designated as a conspiracist. Of course, during the infestation, few would acknowledge they were Marxist sympathizers, so they called themselves Progressives, Feminists & Environmentalists. Now their power is so great that even the dreaded word “Communism” is again being espoused and championed. The Cold War may have been won but the war for hearts & minds is being lost.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-09_708_marxism_went_underground.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-09_708_marxism_went_underground.mp3 2:55 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Marxism, Marxist, humor, politics no Sun, 29 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, FDR, is famous for helming America through The Depression & WW2, and was the progenitor of many social programs, including Social Security. Because of this, he's often derided by The Right as the archetype of socialism. An alternate, and more accurate, interpretation is that he was actually Capitalism's savior. During a time when Marxism was successful and fashionable, FDR undercut the growth of The Left by adopting their rhetoric and co-opting its leaders, which is where the claim that some of his cabinet members were Marxists comes from. At the time, Big Labor was entirely Marxist, 15% of the voter population were Communist sympathizers, and the rest of the Western World had already capitulated or were leaning in that direction. FDR was a master negotiator who adopted just enough socialist ideas for liberty and capitalism to survive. It wasn't until a decade later that a concerted effort was made to push back against Marxist ideology, culminating with McCarthy-style black-listing in the 1950s. Unfortunately, there's now been a complete flip: the Marxists are getting back in control and are doing the black-listing. The time is ripe for another FDR.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-09_707_fdr_and_marxism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-09_707_fdr_and_marxism.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash FDR, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Marxism, Socialism, humor, politics no Fri, 27 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Marxism was en-vogue long before Karl Marx was born, and will probably be where all democracies end up eventually. The core of Marxism: from those according to their ability, to those according to their need; is actually many thousands of years old: Plato would be a Marxist by that definition, and it certainly appears in The New Testament; the very concepts of religion has a penchant for Marxism built in. Socialism isn't new to popularity in America: William Bryan Jennings had 3 unsuccessful but close runs for president at the end of the 19th Century, and the 1928 Democratic candidate, Al Smith, was a Marxist. There's always been actual "Socialist" candidates, such as Eugene Debs, running right up until WWII. The crux of the from-those-to-those tenet is to reverse control from the few Winners to the vast majority of Losers, but because losing never ends up anyplace, eventually Winners climb back into control then the process repeats itself. Right now, about a third of the nation would prefer some form of Marxism: the Equalists, the Environmentalists, and the Social Justice Warriors; but it's always a close thing because many voters would see a short-term gain from Marxist policies. Marxists will have to be repeatedly defeated in elections because if the past is any indicator, Marxism, once implemented, never retreat.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-08_706_past_marxism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-08_706_past_marxism.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Marxism, politics, humor no Wed, 25 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Karl Marx was a German ethnic Jew philosopher-lawyer exiled to London for his political writing in the middle of the 19th Century. He had a nervous disorder and insomnia, and his physical ailments and discomfort probably explain his caustic personality, euphemistically known as “critical theory.” He named all four of his daughters after his wife, Jenny; had a child by his housekeeper; and nicknames for everything. Oddness is often associated with brilliance, and though his work was not recognized in life, within half a Century of his death Karl Marx was the most influential ghost in the world. Marx was originally a economic classical liberal per Adam Smith but became influenced by the collectivist philosophies of Hegel & Rousseau. After meeting wealthy socialist Friedrich Engels, they collaborated to create his seminal work, The Communist Manifesto, a rehashing of Equalist ideology with some naive predictions and improbable economic ideas mixed in. Marx believed Capitalism was responsible for the overthrow of feudalism but that it would eventually cause unacceptable wealth concentration and disparity, alienating the vast majority of the population so that a communist revolution would inevitably occur; he was right except that communism in practice turned out to be subject to even worse exploitation. Marx's fame is completely out of proportion to his intellectual contribution because his ideas appeal to people who want to overturn the status quo.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-08_705_karl_marx.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-08_705_karl_marx.mp3 2:44 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Karl Marx, Marx, The Communist Manifesto, humor, politics no Mon, 23 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Intelligence brings with it self-awareness. It wouldn't have taken long for ancient man to determine that reducing envy & resentment in themselves and others was important to survival because perversity, actions intended to harm others which also harm yourself, a base human emotion which overrides logic, is what destroys civilizations: if too large of a percentage of the population just wants to watch the world burn, it will. Social leaders recognized that suppressing perversity was important, or maybe they were just envious & resentful themselves, but whatever the reason, the concept of: from those according to their ability, to those according to their need, is the foundation of several ideologies past and present, most notably Marxism today. Marxist attitudes also find support in egalitarianism, which is a form of anxiety, those trying to assuage their guilt of having more than others. There are also the altruists, those who enjoy that particularly insidious form of masochism. A proof that Marxism is evolutionary, one need only to recognize how history repeats itself: individuals vary dramatically, one group forming an empire or accumulating great wealth, but statistically, social pressures eventually bring humans back to the mean, which is forced sharing. The current ideological trend of liberty, the focus on personal autonomy, started with The Enlightenment, but notice how modern politics are again returning to Marxist thought.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-07_704_marxism_is_evolutionary.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-07_704_marxism_is_evolutionary.mp3 2:41 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Marxism, humor, politics no Sat, 21 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review what defines gender: Sex is determined by a Y-chromosome but gender is a result of testosterone. Hormones travel through your bloodstream to make you the gender you are. The difference between men and women is testosterone. Testosterone brings with it superpowers, like ambition, competitiveness & exploration. Feminists have an undeclared war on testosterone as a means of leveling the playing field. Declining testosterone has led to diminishing masculinity. Soyboys never received their masculinity trigger. Transgender is about making it all about you. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-07_703_gender_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-07_703_gender_concepts.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash gender, humor, politics no Thu, 19 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Succumbing to social norms is the greatest challenge to individuality; specifically, males face the absolutely frightening prospect of puberty. People will try to exert control over their life anyway they can, and an effective way is to make everything subjective, so it becomes about you; only you can say whether you're male or female: not medicine, not biology, not science; nothing can come between you and your claim; and becoming female has turned out to be an effective method of avoiding the Male Dominance Hierarchy Right-Of-Passage. In the past, this attempt at transcending gender was considered a mental illness, and still is. In psychiatric parlance, it's called a paraphilic disorder, most famously, transvestism or cross-dressing to become sexually aroused, and though transgender is in the same realm, it's more about control, and so confuses the diagnosis. Plus, switching genders has become fashionable. However, grandiosity and self-importance show a distinct lack of regard for the needs of other people. It takes true self-centeredness to demand to simultaneous use the bathroom of the opposite sex, which are gendered for courtesy. Unilaterally declaring yourself to be another gender can certainly collapse social expectations, but those strictures didn't get there by accident; it's the very fabric of society that's being threatened because courtesy works both ways, and the people who's courtesy is being abused will eventually decide to respond in kind.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-07_702_transgender_debate.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-07_702_transgender_debate.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash transgender, humor, politics no Tue, 17 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Over the past four decades there has been a precipitous drop of measured testosterone in boys and the men they grow into, which coincides with the fashionableness of vegetarianism; the so-called “soyboys,” because eating soy supposedly lowers testosterone. However, it's more likely that soyboys are simply a stage all males go through. Prepubescent boys require interaction with other testosterone-wielding boys to trigger their own testosterone production, and this usually involves bullying, hazing & aggression, which is now, ironically, being brutally suppressed. Bullying is spontaneous but not random. It's often blamed on the stronger exploiting the weak but there are plenty of small boys that don't get bullied. Bulling is jockeying for rank, and soyboys are the ones who don't fight back. A boy may think they are minding their own business when a bully walks up but they are actually a flashing red light of soyness: visually they still look effeminate, they may exhibit the lack of self-awareness of children, or they are simply being tested, and if they respond submissively, they actually encourage the bully. Simply stated, boys must be willing to fight back, to respond aggressively to aggression; no amount of passiveness training is going to help. There are things parents can do for their soyboy sons: the easiest counter-measure is playing sports; more drastic is going to Military school; injecting anabolic steroids may be controversial but a soyboy's got to do what a man's got to do.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-06_701_soyboys.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-06_701_soyboys.mp3 2:52 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash soyboys, bullying, humor, politics no Sun, 15 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Testosterone production is in all males but it has societal triggers, the male dominance hierarchy being the most important. However, now that children are not allowed to play freely, and with "if everybody can't have one, no one can" Marxist ideology permeating everywhere, testosterone levels in boys have dramatically diminished. The anti-bullying campaigns have also removed any opportunity for boys to self-segregate into their natural position in a dominance hierarchy; in fact, many males never experience their place in the hierarchy at all; there are no Silverbacks, everyone is a juvenile male. All of this has led to an alarming decrease in testosterone in boys and men, added to by a push against masculinity, defined by self-autonomy and meritocracy, both vital to liberty. Before America began eating itself by attacking masculinity, both political parties supported The Patriarchy; but now The Matriarchy has gained many new, low testosterone recruits, with social-networking bringing them together, and the destruction of the male dominance hierarchy is reducing the number of Alpha males, so women and men-who-act-like-women outnumber masculine men, which is devastating in a democracy. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-06_700_diminishing_masculinity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-06_700_diminishing_masculinity.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash testosterone, dominance, hierarchy, humor, politics no Fri, 13 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Humans have two superpowers: for women, it's childbirth; and for men, it's testosterone. There are many women envious of men's testosterone super-abilities: ambition, competitiveness, physical prowess, and more. Testosterone gives masculine males an advantage in The Patriarchy because liberty, meritocracy & patriotism are benefited by its attributes. Women embrace the diminishment of masculinity and The Patriarchy because it levels the playing field, even puts them at an advantage. In a Matriarchy world, testosterone is denigrated as "toxic masculinity," and public education is like a shield against testosterone because a male dominance hierarchy implies that males must be in charge but the power structure in education is all female. Testosterone's contribution to achievement is also being derided, both directly and insidiously; directly by dismissing any accomplishment as "privilege" or "selfishness;" and subtly by giving equal value to non-accomplishment; everyone gets a trophy. The implementation of “diversity” neutralizes the advantage of testosterone because it circumvents meritocracy. Plus, many low-status men are resentful, and they have joined forces with other weaklings to neutralize the testosterone superpowers of masculine men under the guise of equality. This is perversity of the highest order since it leads directly to the destruction of society, which was created to protect the weak, those with low testosterone.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-05_699_war_on_testosterone.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-05_699_war_on_testosterone.mp3 2:52 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash testosterone, humor, politics no Wed, 11 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Testosterone makes you attractive, ambitious, competitive, confident, protective, and a host of other super-powers. It's kind of amazing that even though people generally know this, it isn't really discussed much in education outside of biology class, when in reality, testosterone, and the superpowers it brings, is more controlling of society than anything other than the female superpower of childbearing. Feminists recognize the advantage testosterone gives to men and resent it, so they denigrate it, especially its most problematic side effects like aggression, territorialism, and lust. Testosterone also makes men adventuresome and curious, and since wisdom comes from knowledge and experience, high-testosterone males have an advantage there too. Testosterone manifests itself differently from man to man, regardless of the levels: a high-testosterone male will certainly sacrifice themselves for their tribe, and testosterone is where the concept of mutually assured destruction comes from: both sides lose when either attacks; and the old adage that the best defense is a good offense was probably influenced by testosterone because nothing prevents aggression better than knowing there's a lot of testosterone on the other side; you think twice before challenging Superman.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-05_698_testosterone_superpower.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-05_698_testosterone_superpower.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash testosterone, humor, politics no Mon, 09 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The blood vessels in your body are a lot like plumbing. The body sends signals through the plumbing, called hormones, and they can go almost everywhere the blood goes. Testosterone and estrogen, the sex hormones, are the most famous, and control gender-related aspects of the body like muscle size and hair growth. Different hormones have different shapes, and as they flow through the blood vessels, cells grab onto them based on their shape, but sometimes hormones that do different things have similar shapes, and the wrong hormone can get snatched up and trigger events they weren't supposed to; for example, injecting testosterone-like substances, called steroids, to appear more manly affects the body in ways that aren't gender related. Hormones can also be turned into other hormones; for example, testosterone can be turned into estrogen. Fat cells do this. Unfortunately, estrogen is the hormone that causes breasts, so overweight boys have that embarrassment to deal with; but that's not all, since fat boys are turning their testosterone into estrogen, they have lower levels of testosterone, and as more and more kids have gotten overweight, the average testosterone in boys has been nosediving. The hormone crisis in children affects society in a much more profound way than any outside influences like Climate Change, yet it's almost invisible to the public consciousness.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-04_696_hormones.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-04_696_hormones.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash hormones, politics, humor no Sat, 07 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The development of the testosterone apparatus in the fetus is what causes all gender differences between males and females; for example, ovaries and gonads start as the same group of cells but are differentiated due to testosterone. Testosterone is also the fundamental difference between males and females during the rest of their lives: physically, intellectually, and emotionally. It's important to note that females have testosterone too, it's just that males have more of it, so-much-so that there lives are virtually defined by how much they have and how well they respond to the impulses. Females convert most of their testosterone into estrogen, the hormone that defines their lives. Raw levels of testosterone don't do the same thing between males and females; the amount of testosterone converted to estrogen differs between men and women, and the testosterone receptors in males are acclimated to higher levels of testosterone than females, so a female who injects herself with a steroid, which is a close relative of testosterone, doesn't have to use very much to get the same testosterone effects as a man. Interestingly, gender differences are a statistical manifestation: if all the females and males in a large group were matched according to their capabilities, almost everybody would have a counterpart of the opposite gender that had the same physical, mental and emotional status; the ones left over are where the perceived difference between men and women comes from.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-04_697_gender_testosterone_differences.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-04_697_gender_testosterone_differences.mp3 2:30 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash gender, testosterone, politics, humor no Thu, 05 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Males and females each start out with a single set of chromosomes that double then doubles the doubles continuously until there's you. Of that first set of chromosomes, 22 of the 23 are exactly the same between males and females, however, the 19th chromosome is shorter in males, called the Y chromosome, versus a female's longer 19th chromosome, called X. Females have biological machinery in that missing area that turns off testosterone, meaning males have testosterone turned on by default. Testosterone then initiates the cascade of changes that make the body into males, and keeps the body acting male throughout life. In a very real sense, testosterone is the fundamental difference between men and women. In fact, females who inject themselves with testosterone will take on the attributes of men, and males who have their testosterone nullified in some way appear effeminate. This can also happen if there is a birth defect, and has led to some bizarre situations; for example, testosterone-resistance means a genetic male can’t be physically distinguished from a female even into maturity; sometimes not knowing until that individual wants to find out why they aren't getting pregnant. Conversely, there are also genetic women with penises similar to men. Many in the transgender community cite these extremely rare cases as proof that they are actually the opposite gender because they think they are, but the fact is, Y-chromosome females have a biological anomaly that prevents their testosterone from working, and X-chromosome males have a physical aberration that produces high levels of testosterone. These aren't just examples of someone thinking they are the other gender, their body's literally operate as if they were.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-03_695_gender_genetics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-03_695_gender_genetics.mp3 3:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash testosterone, genetics, x-chromosome, y-chromosome, humor, politics no Tue, 03 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy What is the Patriarchy? Let's review: Times they are a changing, again... Public schools are more indoctrination than education. There is a concerted attack on liberty, meritocracy & patriotism; termed “The Patriarchy” by the attackers. The Male Dominance Hierarchy defined society until the advent of democracy. Masculinity is an evolutionarily important part of survival. Toxic Masculinity conflates masculine traits to discredit masculinity. Old White Guys have perhaps waited too long before fighting back against women, minorities, and weirdos. Traditional male/female roles aren’t compulsory, they're evolutionary. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-03_694_patriarchy_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-03_694_patriarchy_concepts.mp3 2:05 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash masculinity, the patriarchy, dominance hierarchy, humor, politics no Sun, 01 Dec 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Traditional male/female roles weren’t accidental, and they weren’t society imposed. If men & women were stranded on a desert island, the same roles would soon emerge because they’re evolutionary. When someone slams their car door into my car, I'm the one in our family best equipped to handle it. If the lawn doesn't get mowed, that's my responsibility; but when the children are wailing, my wife can best deal with the situation; and if someone needs a Get Well card, that's her. It's not like either of us couldn't switch roles on a moment's notice, it's simply easier and more comfortable to do what you're good at, so most of the traditional family roles have little downside, and no one is involuntarily exploited. However, girls have been indoctrinated to break the traditional mold since the previous social revolution in the middle of the last century, and combined with the subtle suppression of boys, feminists are attempting a complete reversal of the power dynamic. Preventing anyone from having candy unless everyone can has gradually creeped into promoting activities that empower girls at boys' detriment. Modern society, with the push towards equality and the co-opting of male violence via democracy, is artificial, an aberration in history, and cannot be expected to continue without backlash, which is only now beginning.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-03_693_traditional_roles.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-03_693_traditional_roles.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash traditional, roles, family, humor, politics no Fri, 29 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Older White men, “Old White Guys” or OWGs in the vernacular, are the focus of much of the hostility of the new Left, but they don't seem to know it, or don't understand the ramifications of their lack of action and virtual capitulation. OWGs are still in the mindset that The Left's violation of the unspoken rules: basic courtesy, benefit of the doubt, and respect for others; is hypocrisy and not the total social upheaval that it really is. OWGs lack the recognition that this is a social war, and that there are no rules. Women, minorities & weirdos have never had it so good and they're going to continue with the plan that's been successful so far, which is to demonize masculinity, The Patriarchy, and anything else that gives men an advantage. They already control education, entertainment, media, and government, and have infiltrated business by subverting the concept of Human Resources to restrict job access of White males and give precedence to applicants sympathetic to their cause. Women are now in extremely leveraged positions of power after decades of these preferential hiring practices, and have used Political Correctness to keep anyone from saying anything about what's been happening. When OWGs finally do recognize what's up, it's unclear what they can do to fight back: Lefty politics appeals to the narcissism of entertainers; Tech thinks they're elite and special; media has been co-opted; and where's the plan to break up public education?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-02_692_unaware_owgs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-02_692_unaware_owgs.mp3 2:42 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash OWG, OWGs, humor, politics no Wed, 27 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Masculinity can easily be demonized as “toxic” for its side effects: aggression, anger & sexuality. It used to be overlooked when males exploited their advantages by bullying, dominance, and predatory attitude towards women. In small doses, these traits are actually extremely important in a functioning society, both for men in the male dominance hierarchy, and for women because it ensures stability, but the line between acceptable and toxic is a blurry one, and unusually subjective. If you're a female on the losing end of every competition because the male has the advantage and will not give up, crying foul is a desperation tactic. Feminists also find alliance with low-status men, who combined usually represent more than half the population, a powerful tipping point in a democracy. The corrosive side-effect of attacking masculinity is that all things masculine come under fire. Chivalry and gallantry are impossible in a culture where every act is suspect, so the once-common courtesies of holding the door open for a woman, or defending or helping anonymous women in any way, is discouraged. Unfortunately, this rejection of special consideration has removed the lubricant that smoothed over the difference between the sexes, so male-female friction has developed, and is heating up. There is even the tactic of claiming there's no difference between the sexes, and that masculinity is purely a social construct, foreshadowing the very real chance that toxic masculinity, meaning all masculinity, will be considered a mental illness in the near future.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-02_691_toxic_masculinity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-02_691_toxic_masculinity.mp3 2:48 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash toxic, masculinity, humor, politics no Mon, 25 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Masculinity is an evolutionary creation because meritocracies often produced men whom females mated with; voluntarily or not. Masculinity is most easily defined by its visual features: muscle mass, facial hair, size; but the social manifestations are just as important: ambition, competitiveness, territorialism. In the past, society valued these attributes because they were important in the constant fight to stay alive, and the male dominance hierarchy is almost entirely determined by some combination of them. Society recognized the advantages masculinity gave men over women, and as a consequence, unarticulated obligations were placed on men: protectiveness, preferential treatment, and allowing women to escape the consequences of their provocative actions. Unfortunately, this distortion of the role of masculinity has masked the fact that, ultimately, violence solves conflicts, and by shielding women from this reality, they are unaware of the danger. Democracy may temporarily put control of masculinity in the hands of women but biology haunts the future, and it seems certain masculinity will make a dramatic and revolutionary reemergence.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-01_690_masculinity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-01_690_masculinity.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash masculinity, humor, politics no Sat, 23 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The social dominance hierarchy tends to be a pyramid rather than a totem pole, so those farther down feel the weight of everyone above them, and those near the top have more control over their lives so tend to be happier and more satisfied, at least that's what it looks like to everyone underneath. The very nature of a dominance hierarchy means that individuals low in the pyramid far exceed in number those higher up, and fairness plays no part. Ranking in the dominance hierarchy actually affects body chemistry, and because of testosterone, men predominate at the higher levels, especially since males are evolutionarily defined by dominance, because status literally controls a man's quality of life and even how long they live. The farther a male is up in the hierarchy, uncertainty and threat relatively decrease, decreasing stress, improving both mental and physical health. It's for this reason that higher-ups demean those below them, which suppresses the underling's status, affecting their mental outlook to cause them to stop fighting upward. Democracy artificially overturns the hierarchy; it's unclear how this will affect society as a whole; men seem to be doing poorly, but women, and those traditionally low in the hierarchy are doing much better. Since it's biological, it seems likely that further erosion of the hierarchy, and subsequent suppression of basic male drive, is not going to end well.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-01_689_dominance_hierarchy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-09-01_689_dominance_hierarchy.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash male, dominance hierarchy, humor, politics no Thu, 21 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The Patriarchy is the concepts of liberty, meritocracy & patriotism that used to be the foundation of American values but, unfortunately, favors a minority of the population. The rest should be expected to try and change things for their benefit, and they've been doing so for a century, with slowly accumulating results. For example, it took decades for women, minorities & Socialists to get control of the institutions of propaganda: government, entertainment, education, Tech & media; and they're not going to walk away just because they've finally been noticed, and certainly not when there is still no counter-attack from those they intend to overthrow. The plan was obviously longterm and coordinated. It's instigators were already in place because Marxists didn't go anywhere just because the Soviet Union fell. First they got control of education. Next, Hollywood had long been a hotbed of Collectivist sentiment so a little sanctimonious encouragement resulted in their full capitulation. Tech was a matter of strategically spending money and manipulating the Boards of Directors and Human Resources departments. Government jobs are by definition socialist, as are their Welfare clients, and democracies naturally tend in that direction. The biggest coup was buying up the media outlets and flooding the airwaves with propaganda intended to indoctrinate the population and discourage any organization of a counter-revolution. All during this time, The Patriarchy didn't notice because they have been focused on making more money.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-31_688_attack_on_the_patriarchy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-31_688_attack_on_the_patriarchy.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash patriarchy, humor, politics no Tue, 19 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The single biggest cause of today's social revolution is that the indoctrination has changed; education, entertainment, and the media are all promoting a new set of values; ones that are incompatible with those previous. Since children have yet to form opinions, the first one they hear from an authority figure is the one they will probably adopt throughout life because changing someone's opinion verges on impossible. The places where children hear the most opinions is home, church, school & television. Indoctrination at home and church is considered acceptable, but there has always been concern about school and media. School is especially virulent because public education is a monopoly with little parental influence, and media has been totally compromised by those who seek power & control for themselves. It all starts in the schools: students may teach themselves art, math & science, but they learn ideology from their surroundings; a constant undermining of the ideals of liberty, meritocracy & patriotism. Since education is primarily feminine, the current indoctrination is overturning these patriarchal values of the past and supplanting them with their own. Students are forced to behave as women want them to: traditional male attitudes are swiftly chastised, even punished; inclusiveness is the goal rather than excellence; and thoughts that do not conform to the collectivist narrative are discouraged. It's clear that regaining indoctrination control is paramount because those who control the indoctrination control everything.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-31_687_indoctrination.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-31_687_indoctrination.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash indoctrination, humor, politics no Sun, 17 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The last time the world changed like it is now was in the 1960s; it was called the Generation Gap, and occurred because American prosperity allowed children to be raised, not as additional workers to help support the family, but with personal autonomy, the impetus for them to make decisions for themselves and freedom from the harsh authority of parents. As they grew, they rebelled completely from the norms established back when subsistence wasn't assured and force-of-arms ruled the world. We went from a paternalistic society to a much more liberal one where people were encouraged to think and act outside of established expectations. Those times are happening again for the same reason: children have been given even more freedom and autonomy, so-much-so that the basic customs, values & traditions of Western society are being challenged. This time the gap is not so much generational as it is a total reversal of all things once considered settled: race, sex, economics. Because this revolution is so profound and so consuming, older people suspect it's organized by some outside force bent on destroying America; but a simpler explanation is that, just like the last social revolution, the half of the population that has not traditionally held power is attempting to doing so, and our connected society, Social Media in particular, has given them the organization to try.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-30_686_changing_times.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-30_686_changing_times.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Generation Gap, changing times, revolution, humor, politics no Fri, 15 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy We have to review philosophy often or it slips away: Most famous philosophers simply got it wrong. The more you know about Plato, the less you like him. Nietzsche's human insight is only exceeded by the difficulty spelling his name. The contradictions of Western ideology can best be explained with the concept of Slave Morality. Deductive Reasoning requires knowledge to find the truth of things, and Inductive Reasoning gets the process started. Many people may have no value rationally speaking, but liberty speaking they do. Liberty requires that you allow other people to live as they please, and that they do the same for you. Whatever peace is, it seems likely this is it. However strong the social stricture against it, torture will be employed if the need is great enough. The philosophy of philosophy is that anyone can be a philosopher. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-30_686_philosophy_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-30_686_philosophy_concepts.mp3 2:40 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash philosophy, humor, politics no Wed, 13 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Explaining why is the most scientific of pursuits, yet the most important why of all, the philosophy that guides our lives, is the least explained. We are all budding philosophers, whether or not we can consciously articulate our philosophy, which most people can't. Of those that can, the ones who accurately assign motive to action, reason to existence; very, very few of them become famous, because philosophy is an individual pursuit, interesting to no one but yourself, outside of sophomore English. Insightful people have the greatest advantage of being philosophers but can unexceptional otherwise, and philosophers aren't necessarily wise either, though that's the natural assumption. You can objectively identify a wise person by their works, but many philosophers have no visible indication they have special understanding; you must contemplate their ideas to discover if they're right for you; but they usually aren't; your own philosophy is probably just as good.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-30_684_budding_philosophers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-30_684_budding_philosophers.mp3 1:55 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash philosophy, philosophers, humor, politics no Mon, 11 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The visceral reaction of most people against torture is an induced one; it's not something built into our DNA. Throughout history, torture has risen and fallen in social esteem; and has often been used in an official capacity. With that kind of track record, the only way to stop torture is to indoctrinate children against it, yet there is a whole genre of popular entertainment that revels in graphic onscreen torture using the most vile and reprehensible methods; and torture triggers the brain's pleasure centers of sadists, masochists & psychopaths; all small but significant percentages of any population. This obsession with torture is evolutionarily ambiguous unless the cognitive component explains it: people will consciously choose to torture if the circumstances demanded it. Only an over-civilized and self-deluded people can deny the viability of torture: if the time came, and two men were in a room: one who knew where the bomb was and the other with a pair of pliers, we'd know where that bomb was soon enough; and regardless of society's penalties, the pliers-guy would selflessly choose go to prison in order to provide the life-saving information: it's torture excused by altruism.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-28_683_torture.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-28_683_torture.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash torture, politics, humor no Sat, 09 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy What does peace look like? Heaven? Something from a fiction story where people dress suspiciously like the Amish? Defining peace certainly isn't as simple as not being at war; which brings up the question of what is the opposite of peace? Obviously, peace is a subjective term; other people either have a different concept of peace, or a different threshold. From a practical pov, the world is mostly at peace now, but it's easy to find someone to argue the point with, even though the irony of sipping over-priced coffee using student loan money seems to be lost on them. People sometimes talk about a philosophy of Peace but the concept is easily debunked the first time they get punched in the face. Ghandi is often brought up as an example of peace, but if that's the trade-off, most people would want to be left out of Peaceland; all those undernourished, half-dressed guys lose more Peaceniks than they gain. Really, in a historical context, peace now is as good as it's ever been, and it will probably get peacier in the future: think 50 years, because when viewed in half-century increments, a millennium from now we may just achieve heaven on earth like they talk about in the fiction stories.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-28_682_peace.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-28_682_peace.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash peace, humor, politics no Thu, 07 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Philosophically speaking, the concept of live & let live is highly controversial. As liberty-indoctrinated Americans, it may seem instinctual, but a lot of people have not had this refrain drilled into them, so they have no problem telling other people how to live; it's getting to be more-and-more, live-as-I-live. In a Liberty society, we don't have to like each other, we don't even have to respect each other, we only need to have a treaty to leave each other alone, to live & let live, in an alliance only when necessary. Live & let live also applies outside the realm of humans; for example, why shouldn't wolves run free? If they're not hurting anybody then let them; if they kill livestock then recompense the owners. Only in the extreme circumstance where wild animals are not letting people live must their lives be forfeit. In fact, all creatures should be let live, even inanimate objects, even esoteric concepts like wilderness, solitude and ideas. The very nature of conservation and conservatism rests on a universal live & let live attitude.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-26_681_live__let_live.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-26_681_live__let_live.mp3 2:04 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash live and let live, humor, politics no Tue, 05 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Do all people have value? From a purely objective, one-dimensional perspective, the answer is categorically no. Most other life on earth has no sentimentality towards its weaker members. The world would be easier to navigate with less pressure on a society that rids itself of its undesirables: execution, incarceration, banishment, and emigration fueled by ostracization. Certainly when someone is no longer productive, a meritocracy has no use for them, there is no rational argument against euthanasia, so what is the value that all people have? Something fundamental must explain why a society is founded on the premise that all people have value regardless of their cost. Ignoring mystical sources, the instinct must be evolutionary, perhaps a way to maintain the wisdom of the old & enfeebled. The biological mechanism to get the able-bodied to exhaust their own productivity for consumption by the needy, is altruism, specifically the dopamine bath altruism brings. Masochism also gives dopamine satisfaction from what seems like an exploitative situation. In other circumstances, different biological drives dominate; for example, the need to reduce anxiety is why putting someone in jail for the duration of their lives is chosen over execution. Certainly, from a liberty perspective, it's up to you whether you have value.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-26_680_all_people_have_value.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-26_680_all_people_have_value.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash value of life, all people have value, politics, humor no Sun, 03 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy If any philosophy is to be taken seriously, it must be logically understandable. There are basically three kinds of logic: deductive, inductive, and abductive. Deductive reasoning follows three if-and-then steps, called a syllogism, in which two statements reach a logical conclusion, for example: all men are mortal, and you are a man, then you are mortal. Syllogisms require knowledge to determine truth. When you don't have any knowledge, use Inductive reasoning, which makes broad generalizations from specific observations; for example: the first three coin flips were heads therefore the next one will be. Unfortunately, we all knows how that turns out if you rely on the outcome. Though not a proof of truth, Inductive reasoning is useful for creating hypotheses which could be turned into Deductive reasoning. When you only have partial knowledge, Abductive reasoning is what doctors and lawyers use; for example, if a dog is alone in a room all day, a person might conclude that the dog ate the pie on the counter, but that's only the most likely scenario; maybe someone else ate the pie, or it was a mistake and the pie wasn't really there. Diagnoses uses this technique, and people in juries consider a preponderance of evidence, and personal anecdotes don't count. Faulty reasoning explains most of what's wrong with the world.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-24_679_deductive_vs_inductive_reasoning.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-24_679_deductive_vs_inductive_reasoning.mp3 2:35 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash reasoning, inductive, deductive, abductive, humor, politics no Fri, 01 Nov 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Nietzsche's "Slave Morality" is named after how slaves react to being subservient. Slaves are envious & resentful of their masters, so like all revolutionary thought, they turn the status quo values upside-down to form their own competing values. The attitude of slaves is to be against everything their masters represent; if their masters value merit, pride, honor & autonomy, then slaves take the opposite: equality over meritocracy, humility over pride, submission over honor, and group over individual. If control is in the strong then slaves revel in weakness; focus on the competent becomes altruism towards the feeble-minded, and a society that caters to the ineffectual and downtrodden. Slaves, of course, vilify “oppressors,” and their morality is typified by pessimism and cynicism. “Good” is redefined to be the opposite of the winners. Original Christianity, in passive-aggressive defiance of their Roman masters, is a Slave Morality religion. The Ten Commandments are negative "Do not" values; the opposites of pride, consumption, ambition, etc., which are the established values of those who have control. In the New Testament, rich men are ridiculed, poverty is lauded, and rationality is punished. People who are not slaves, who have control over their lives, have positive values, things to do rather than things not to do. Unfortunately, if slaves eventually become masters, the perversity of Slave Morality dooms their civilization.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-24_678_slave_morality.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-24_678_slave_morality.mp3 2:51 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Slave Morality, humor, politics no Wed, 30 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Friedrich Nietzsche probably gets more pseudo-intellectual airtime than any other philosopher with his deeply insightful aphorisms, the most famous of which are: Love is blind. That which does not kill us makes us stronger. He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. If you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. What does your conscience say? You should become the person you are. In every man a child is hidden that wants to play. And: God is dead.   As entertaining and ubiquitous those sayings are, Nietzsche's genius for comprehension also produced less commercial but more useful understandings: There are no facts, only interpretations. I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you. It is hard enough to remember my opinions, without also remembering my reasons for them. In heaven, all the interesting people are missing. And my personal favorite is: The higher we soar, the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-22_677_nietzsche_quotes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-22_677_nietzsche_quotes.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Nietzsche, quotes, humor, politics no Mon, 28 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Philosophers have an insidious impact on the world; for example, the most famous Western philosopher, Plato, is the inspiration of Marxism. His self-serving suggestion is that government should be by a philosopher-king, and his platform includes infanticide to prevent overpopulation, death to those who deny the omniscience of the State, belief that only philosophers, himself in particular, have clarity on The Truth, from those according to their ability to those according to their need, control of art, children are wards of the State without knowledge of their parents, selective breeding, no private property, wealth equality, and the State determines the careers of every member of society. Yikes.   Plato was also a mystic: he taught that there is a place we all come from before birth that knows the perfect truth, both knowledge & morality, but we can only vaguely remember, and our search for truth is actually fully remembering. Yikes. However, Plato's most famous pupil, Aristotle, a philosopher that had even more impact on historical and modern ideologies, suggested that truth must be discovered through scientific investigation. Thank goodness for Aristotle or we'd be at the mercy of Plato.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-22_676_plato.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-22_676_plato.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Plato, humor, politics no Sat, 26 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There may be unknown philosophers who got it right, but they aren't famous; the ones we hear about mostly got it wrong. The father of “rationalism,” Rene' Descartes, believed that we could rely on reason to find truth without depending on tradition or experts. Unfortunately, Descartes didn't even trust his own senses but instead believed he could reason out any fact solely in his mind, without experience, leading to his famous quote, “I think therefore I am.” Those who believed that truth can only be determined through experimentation, such as Bacon and Locke, were called “empiricists.” This was the beginning of the modern scientific method. Unfortunately, when this philosophy was emerging during the 1700s, religion and God were still very much accepted as legitimate answers to secular questions. Confucius thought it was of paramount importance to fit into the existing society. He called this strategy “the Way.” In practice this meant that people were born into a specific class, such as servant or noble, and they must fulfill the roles of that class regardless, and for life. He thought social harmony supersedes individual fulfillment; unfortunately, the opposite of liberty.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-20_675_unfortunately__philosophers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-20_675_unfortunately__philosophers.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash philosophy, Confucius, Descartes, Locke, Bacon, humor, politics no Thu, 24 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy If you don't have a guru already, I'm here for you: Unusual advice is the best because other people aren't taking it. There's an established cannon of advice you should not be following. Succinctness is an art few practice because they like to hear themselves talk. If you're only remembered for one thing, chances are it's an aphorism. You become the person that's needed. Ride the alligators but don't let them eat you. Outside obligations only commit you if you let them. The secret to a successful life is convenience & routine. Enlightenment leaves little room for optimism. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-20_674_life_advice_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-20_674_life_advice_concepts.mp3 2:08 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aphorisms, humor, politics no Tue, 22 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Here's a personal observation that probably doesn't apply to anyone else so take my word for it. Achievements are like climbing a mountain; each step up giving you a better view of from whence you came. After each accomplishment, I thought I might be high enough above the valley to look down and make sense of life, but in actuality, every time I got to the top, I could see higher mountains in the distance, so I pursued those mountains. It seemed unlikely I would ever get to the top of all the mountains... But I did. From where I am now, I don't see anything higher. There are lots of valleys below that are dark and impenetrable but nothing seems unexplainable, even life itself. Unfortunately, this understanding, this enlightenment so to speak, has sapped my optimism because my myths and delusions have been undermined. I wanted there to be order but there is only chaos, which is obviously why enlightened people delve into mysticism. Now I'm hoping the clouds above me conceal another higher mountain, and I can climb that one and maybe make more sense from there, which means there's at least a wee bit of optimism remaining.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-20_673_mountain_metaphor.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-20_673_mountain_metaphor.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash mysticism, mountain metaphor, humor, politics no Sun, 20 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Longterm goals are easy to wish for but difficult to achieve, so most people don't accomplish much of anything. However, there are two simple rules that make goals obtainable: first, no matter how easy a goal is, if it's not convenient, chances are you won't do it. Convenience is the most under-appreciated of all life's little pleasures: to simply reach out and grasp your desire. If convenience were figured in, the price of many things would change dramatically. But even if they're convenient, tedious goals, things like losing weight or learning to play piano, require mindless routine. You have a set list of things to do everyday, in a particular order, and you put the boring thing you would normally procrastinate in the lineup. Once it gets into mind-numbed daily repetition, it will simply happen, and eventually your goal will be reached. For things that take years, routine is the only strategy that works. Convenience & routine are also valuable because they're something you actually have a lot of control over; giving you direct influence over the direction of your career, health & entertainment.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-18_672_convenience__routine.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-18_672_convenience__routine.mp3 2:09 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash convenience, routine, politics, humor no Fri, 18 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Outside Obligations are unilateral contracts made about you but in which you were not given a chance to negotiate; for example, church established ethics and morals, and “Ask Heloise” type manners fall into this category. Out of personal courtesy, you may even adhere to these informal social dictates, but the demands can quickly become much greater: church tithing, charities, tipping, union dues; and those are just the monetary burdens. Social obligations can be the most burdensome: fraternal organizations like Rotary or Lion's Club are a breeding ground for onerous shame, guilt & time-wasting. But all of those outside obligations have a component of voluntarism, however ineffectual; the most egregious exploitation of outside obligations comes from the world, other countries that practice Socialism and can’t understand why U.S. citizens won’t do “what's best for everyone,” in their estimation anyway: stop using energy, stop supporting Israel, increase international aid. The widening rift between the American citizenry and the EU country citizens has it’s genesis in these foreign imposed obligations. Societal expectations, values, ethics, morals, customs, courtesy, manners, and all other outside obligations are the slippery slope leading to authoritarianism, but the world without them would be scary indeed.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-18_671_outside_obligations.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-18_671_outside_obligations.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash outside obligations, humor, politics no Wed, 16 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy How often have you been told to make a plan for your life? That “common sense” advice alone is enough to show that most people don't understand how life operates because you can't predict the future, so you can't plan it; you can only have a goal and do the first thing that seems likely to achieve that goal; it's all a mad scramble after that. An apt metaphor, is trying to cross a river on the backs of alligators. There's always a river between you and where you're trying to get to, and the river is filled with alligators, a lot of them, and they're swimming all around: your strategy is to jump onto the back of the closest one that looks like it might be going the right way. The thing about alligators is that they're hard to control and will often start going the wrong way, plus, they'll eat you if you stay on too long; better to change to another alligator whenever that seems to be about to happen. It's a wide river, and over your career you'll be jumping onto a lot of alligators. Chances are you'll never get to where you wished you were going but you'll end up somewhere? A lot of people don't like alligators; even if they're unhappy with where they ended up, they won't change, but if you have the gumption, go down to the river and catch a ride.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-16_670_riding_alligators.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-16_670_riding_alligators.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash riding alligators, humor, politics no Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Most people assume the personality they exhibit right now is them. Given no change in circumstances, that's probably true but there is research that actually proves the old adage that people “will rise to the occasion.” What that means is that your personality depends on the circumstances, and if circumstances change, so will your personality, dramatically so; you're not who you think you are. There are roughly four categories of personalities in every group of people: Leader, Bully, Joker, Nerd. You will morph to fit whichever slot is open; a Leader from one group may be a Nerd in another. Depending on the tumult in your life, you may assume a different role each time you join a group, depending on the mix. If a group needs a leader, no matter how cautious and demure you are, you may act in a Leader capacity if no one else will, as will other people in similar situations. Certainly, throughout your life, especially during your childhood, you have been all of these things; that's how humanity managed to survive: even though we are frail creatures individually, as a group we metamorph into something undefeatable.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-16_669_youre_not_who_you_think_you_are.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-16_669_youre_not_who_you_think_you_are.mp3 2:08 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash personality, leader, humor, politics no Sat, 12 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy People write whole books that could be boiled down to a single sentence, an aphorism: a witty saying highlighting a truth that survives long after the author. Benjamin Franklin was accomplished in many fields but it's “apple a day” and “penny saved” sayings that we remember him by. The cleverness of an aphorism is in direct proportion to its memorability, but at the same time they need to contain a universal truth; that’s a difficult tightrope, and probably why there doesn't seem to be many people who are quotable? Obviously, aphorisms are popular; a simple internet search will reveal thousands of them. Unfortunately, many of the most famous quotes are simply wrong: fairy tales written for the naive, or misinterpretations that have become accepted as fact because they are undisputed; for example, “it's better to give than to receive,” or “if a job is worth doing, it is worth doing well,” both of which are nonsense but goes unchallenged because they're close to scripture at this point. It would take a wise person indeed to go through all the existing aphorisms and sort out the good from the bad, but the results would be well worth it because a distinctive aphorism is often the only insight a person still retains throughout their life.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-14_668_aphorisms.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-14_668_aphorisms.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aphorism, saying, humor, politics no Thu, 10 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Intelligent authors make wise observations but the gist is flooded by so many worthless words that it's impossible to dig it out. Whole books are written that contain only a single premise, one that could be written in a sentence first then explained in a couple more pages if you still wanted to read. Normally, I and most people, read the first sentence of an article then skedaddle. It's unclear why writers regurgitate so many words just to obscure their point? Do they think verbosity is more convincing? Are there really concepts described in 400 paragraphs that can't be said in 4? Are they paid by the word? Speaking is the same way: I don't have the time nor inclination to listen to somebody talk for an hour when 5 bullet points and a memory mnemonic would have been enough; as a matter of fact, 3 bullet points would be better. I must be the only one who thinks this way because YouTube is full of hours upon hours of talking heads saying nothing I couldn't have read in less than a minute. Logically, an interesting concept could make a bigger impact if the speakers would have got in and got out because more people would have heard everything they had to say. It's not like I'm the only one who's ever mentioned the value of succinctness, and even two paragraphs is too long.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-14_667_succinctness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-14_667_succinctness.mp3 2:19 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Succinctness, succinct, humor, politics no Tue, 08 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It seems unfair that most of the homilies we are taught as children simply aren’t true; it’s part of the fantasy of childhood that, hopefully, adults mature out of. We would all like to think that the world is a better place than it is, and you can't make it that way if you don't know what's wrong. If you haven't discovered what's not the truth yet, let me tell you, but pay careful attention because, like all not advice, people tend to ignore it, especially if it doesn't match the accepted narrative. Starting out with one of the biggest lies: you do NOT have to spend money to make money. Along those same lines, if you build it, they will NOT come. Continuing: people do NOT get what they deserve; do NOT buy a dog to keep you company; life is a NOT a meritocracy; people do NOT do-the-right-thing; we are NOT all in this together; honesty is NOT the best policy; do NOT “pay it forward;” everyone does NOT love a comedian; and you are NOT unique & special. Even though all of these NOTs are hard truths, take my advice, or not.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-12_666_not_advice.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-12_666_not_advice.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash advice, humor, politics no Sun, 06 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Conservatism has lots of good aspects, most importantly it keeps things that are working well, working well, but it does have the significant downside of limiting people's creativity. Liberals don't have that problem but then again, you have to be suspicious of the selfishness of liberalism, which is probably why Conservatives don't recognize when the Liberals have it right. Then there are all those people who aren't exactly sure what it means to be Conservative or Liberal, so a little unusual life advice is in order. First, people are too timid and life is too short, so: buy cool cars even if they are undependable; dress however you want; wear strange facial hair; ignore the opinions of others; blow with the wind when it's taking you in an interesting direction but hold firm when you must; eat strange food that might make you sick; travel to places without reading the guide; try recreational drugs once; wear hats that make you look silly; become an expert in a musical genre; and most important, follow unusual life advice.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-12_665_unusual_life_advice.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-12_665_unusual_life_advice.mp3 2:28 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash life, advice, humor, politics no Fri, 04 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy People of the Old Testament were onto something when they identified the sins: Almost all human motivations emanate from our negative emotions. Envy is the limit we allow other people to outperform us. Jealously ensures the genealogy of the patriarchy. Resentment builds over time, eventually flipping the scales over to hate. Spite is an evolutionary mechanism version of crabs-in-a-bucket. Perversity is as illogical as it is irrational but is none-the-less extremely common because it feels so good. The pervasive nature of vindictive behavior justifies a least a little paranoia. Fear easily overpowers all other emotions which is why people seek security above all else. Humanity requires anger to be human. Selfishness is the natural state of being the Center-of-the-Universe. Slothful people are non-productive, not lazy. When getting back means causing harm, that's revenge. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-10_664_sins_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-10_664_sins_concepts.mp3 2:51 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sin, sins, humor, politics no Wed, 02 Oct 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It’s interesting that so many storylines, some of the most compelling ones in fact, are centered on getting back at another person or another team, mostly out of competitive spirit. This feeling can obviously be experienced vicariously; the dopamine reaction fans feel when their sports team defeats the rival, who barely beat them last time on a technicality, is sweet indeed. Stories about avenging angels who retaliate on behalf someone else who was wronged are also popular. Luckily, for entertainment purposes, there are many opportunities for retaliatory-satisfaction in almost every situation; but once competitiveness slides into wishing someone harm in response, that’s revenge. Revenge is perverse: animals don’t seek revenge; there is no competitive advantage for such an expense, but humans use revenge as motivation, a very powerful one that can easily become counter-productive. What makes it dangerous is that a person's self-image is often directly tied to what others think of them; people want admiration but will settle for respect, and if some person or group damages that fragile sense of self-worth, the recipient will be incensed and seek retribution, tearing the fabric of society to do it. Revenge is both nature and nurture.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-10_663_revenge.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-10_663_revenge.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash revenge, humor, politics no Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Sloth is an old word, kind of strange, rather misunderstood. Laziness is often considered the definition of sloth but lazy people don’t like to do anything, while slothful people don’t actually accomplish anything. Slothful people can be quite active pursuing their own self-gratification, but there is no lasting achievement, just purely consumptive activities like fitness, food & fantasy. People may be habitually lazy due to lack of motivation, but slothful people are highly motivated, just not from society's standpoint. As a nation, the dissatisfaction has hit a level where many people feel their situation cannot be improved through any actions they take themselves, at least not at the cost: 40-hour work week at a Minimum Wage job versus playing Fortnite all day and trolling Chat Rooms at night, is an easy calculation to make; there is no impetus for them to contribute to the existing status quo. It also explains their disdain toward productive achievement; the slothful have lost their naive optimism and are faced with a conclusion that makes their choice the logical one: to seek entertainment at the exclusion of all else.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-10_662_sloth.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-10_662_sloth.mp3 2:11 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sloth, humor, politics no Sat, 28 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It would be strategic to assume that the vast majority of what we see, hear, and experience is distorted by our own selfishness, or the selfishness of others. Our selfishness manifests itself in all aspects of our lives; even decisions supposedly made for altruistic reasons usually have a modicum of selfishness at their core. Selfishness is the foundation of many sins: greed, the focus on obtaining more for yourself; covetousness, lusting after what other's have for yourself; gluttony, personal consumption beyond all practical purpose; and avarice, an excessive desire for possessions for yourself. Humans are born selfish since everyone is the center of the universe from their perspective, and without societal conditioning, people would remain selfish. It's obvious why selfishness is important to both personal and evolutionary success, but also obvious why tempering selfishness for the needs of the group is important to a society. Because both goals are required, striking the balance between the selfish individual who acts for their own interests, and being a cog within a fraternity of equals, is the fundamental basis of the two major competing political ideologies: Liberty versus Marxism.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-08_661_selfishness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-08_661_selfishness.mp3 2:23 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash selfish, selfishness, humor, politics no Thu, 26 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In the primitive battle for survival and social dominance, anger overcomes reason and even fear. Anger is the “fight” component of the fight-or-flight response, and apparently it's very important to human existence, considering its prevalence. Anger is provoked by a myriad of stimuli: threat, frustration, even embarrassment. Anger is primordial: there is a disruption of the body’s homeostasis excited by adrenalin with physical manifestations like sweating, pupil contraction, raising blood pressure & body temperature; and the result is often physical confrontation. Because anger is physiological, its intensity cannot be maintained and dissipates quickly, but smoldering anger leads to the entire cornucopia of unsavory emotions. Defying logic, anger will encourage conflict even in the face of certain defeat, which makes the powerless dangerous; an important consideration in personal relationships and society at large, because beyond a tipping point, intimidation is no longer possible to subjugate people, so depending on the form of government, if the populous becomes angry, no amount of force will quell their uprising.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-08_660_anger.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-08_660_anger.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash anger, humor, politics no Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy No emotion is more based in genetic conservation than fear. Fear triggers our primordial fight-or-flight response via a cauldron of visceral chemical reactions that have successfully protected homo sapiens as they evolved. All responses, from the unconscious to the cognitive, are intended to reduce fear, and people will do whatever they have to make fear go away. Modern humans are no less fearful than our ancestors, maybe more so since we have little relative experience with real danger, which is why we are frighted of so many pretend dangers: bike helmets, Identity Theft, GMO food. Because of our fear of fear, security is the primary imperative. The impetus for forming a society is for protection: more than companionship, more than sustenance, more than control; because fear is the operational emotion of our instinct for survival. This is why fear can be so successfully exploited by politicians, and why inanity can overcome logic; because our instinct overwhelms our reason. Fortunately, or unfortunately, we have become so successful at protecting everyone from fear, that most people have lost perspective about where security comes from; that the primary weapon against fear is violence.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-06_659_fear.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-06_659_fear.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash fear, humor, politics no Sun, 22 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Vindictiveness is on the fringe of human emotions, usually the result of a personality disorder such as Narcissism or Borderline: typified as self-destructive, paranoid, with a lot of repressed aggression. It's especially prominent during an individual's climbing of the social hierarchy, ultimately as it pertains to mating opportunities but also while seeking control over their own lives. They are often frustrated in their attempts by other individuals with similar motives. When that happens, vindictive people make the thwarting of their ambitions personal, as if the person who brushed past them did it intentionally, and resolve to get revenge. Even if the cause is real, vengeance, the active part of vindictiveness, goes beyond punishment as retribution for an illegal act. Vengeance is emotional, pathological even, outside the law; it's not rehabilitative, nor protective, serves no valid societal function, and should be discouraged and avoided. Unfortunately, vindictiveness can also be triggered by envy, jealously & resentment. These perceived slights often lead to long-term grudges, sometimes without the other person even knowing they are the focus of the hostility, which is why some paranoia is always justified when you suspect others may be working against you because they actually may be.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-06_658_vindictiveness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-06_658_vindictiveness.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash vengeance, vindictive, vindictiveness, humor, politics no Fri, 20 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The most bizarre of the negative emotions is perversity: the willful determination to act counter to someone else’s interests, even at your own detriment. It's like spite, in that you intend to thwart the intentions of another person, but you make that choice knowing that it will materially harm your own situation. This is the seminal example of irrationality overwhelming logic: it doesn't make sense but the feeling of satisfaction it brings is worth the cost. In comparison, a plan to sacrifice a little to win big isn't perverse because the payoff is tangible, not just the invisible release of dopamine in the brain which perversity provides. Perversity is a useful deceit because it eludes suspicion by being illogical, and requires the self-awareness of others to recognize what is going on. Like all the negative emotions, people choose not to admit they are perverse, which makes them blind when it's happening to them. Unfortunately, perversity explains a lot of history, and is certainly an everyday occurrence now, but not something you want to dwell on because to view life through the lens of perversity uses up your optimism hoping for the worst. Perversity and altruism are at war within your psyche, and the most dopamine wins.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-04_657_perversity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-04_657_perversity.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash perversity, humor, politics no Wed, 18 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Spite is a malicious desire to harm, annoy, frustrate, or humiliate another person, often one who has no animosity towards you or you them. The reason why spite is instinctual is that a good defense is the best offense; if another member of your tribe is ascending the social hierarchy, with all that entails including mating opportunities, it's in an individual's best interest to hinder that. This is simple politics, and the favorable interpretation of spite; the reality of spite is much less utilitarian because it's normally a response to envy, jealousy, or resentment, and has no positive reward other than secret satisfaction. Sometimes people act spiteful because of the feeling of control it gives, which they savor by knowing it was them who tipped the balance, and control not acted upon is an opportunity lost. Even if there is no outward personal gain, the dopamine hit of being spiteful is enough. Because spite is a control issue, it doesn't have to be intended against another person, not even a living thing: children will kick down an anthill, throw rocks through windows, and spray paint graffiti simply out of spite. Even mature adults indulge their spiteful impulses on occasion, though they are careful to conceal their intentions lest other folks start suspecting, because the penalty for spite is spite: nothing feels as good as spiting the person who spited you.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-04_656_spite.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-04_656_spite.mp3 2:32 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash spite, humor, politics no Mon, 16 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Resentment is bitter indignation directed towards you by others who perceive you as interfering with their own objectives, real or imagined. Resentment is also generated in others who are envious of you, or covetous of your things, or simply lust after your wife. You even generate resentment in people who you don't know; every time someone hears your name in a comparison that shows them in poor light, a little bit of resentment seeps in. Resentment is dangerously insidious because we all harbor it yet we never do anything about it, even though we may acknowledge it; “I hate that guy.” Most people like to control their own destinies; if everyone could choose what they wanted to do, it's unlikely that taking orders from someone else would be their preference. Because control is an evolutionary imperative, if you have even the slightest say over someone else's life, no matter what kind of person you think you are, resentment against you will build. Like arsenic, resentment accumulates but rarely dissipates. Resentment is the reason that enemies are so common and supporters so rare, and what makes a friend ultimately betray you.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-02_655_resentment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-02_655_resentment.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash resentment, humor, politics no Sat, 14 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Like all negative emotions, jealousy is rooted in evolution: a male's biological imperative is to continue his gene line, and since males can't determine the parentage of their offspring, they must control access to the female. This is the most commonly exhibited aspect of jealousy, but jealousy is also tightly tied to fears of humiliation if another male usurps their mate, as well as a feeling of abandonment that comes with betrayal of a partner's loyalty, both males and females. Because of the anxiety these constant threats produce, the consequences of jealously are often obsessiveness, damaged self-esteem, and violent behavior. Jealousy is not limited to sexual relations; it will exhibit itself if any relationship is threatened: with parents, friendships, co-workers. Jealousy is constant, and though a society needs its members to suppress their most egregious jealous reactions, jealousy is still important because it motivates people to preserve long term social bonds. It's another of those seemingly negative emotions that people are reluctant to discuss or even admit they possess, which makes it difficult to determine the distinction between bad and good amounts of jealousy.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-02_654_jealousy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-02_654_jealousy.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash jealousy, humor, politics no Thu, 12 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Envy is ubiquitous and one of the most fundamental of emotions. Envy is one's own discontent with regard to another's advantages, successes & possessions. It's telling that our envy towards the accomplishments of others is so powerful that it controls every aspect of how we act; yet we deny this truth completely because we don't want to admit it to ourselves. In fact, envy is so primitive that unless you maintain your awareness that it's there, you may not recognize that it's affecting your objectivity. Envy is universal because it's actually hardwired into our physiology; your brain is stimulated by envy via the hormone, oxytocin. Physical manifestations like this must be grounded in evolutionary pressure, probably because the superlative achievements of a rival lead to more and better mating opportunities, plus the advantages in food procurement, as well as general improvement in living conditions that a more capable or lucky competitor enjoy. When limited resources are involved, the gain of one would be at the expense of the other, which makes it imperative that the less fortunate individual or group envy and attempt to prevent successful indulgence by competitors. It's sad to think we are dominated by envy but it's comforting to know everyone else feels it too.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-31_653_envy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-31_653_envy.mp3 2:19 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash envy, humor, politics no Tue, 10 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Societies have long recognized that the big three visceral motivations: envy, jealously & resentment; are deleterious, and warn against them. Why? Because they manifest as spite, perversity & vindictiveness; which are destructive all around. It's actually rather curious that more emphasis is not given to these base feelings because they are quite predictive, but people wish it wasn't true, so they ignore their own complicity in being bad. In fact, it's probably the case that if asked, most everyone would deny they are often consumed with counterproductive thoughts, no matter the evidence to the contrary. Then there is another group of negative emotions that explain the rest of human activity: fear, anger, lust, avarice, selfishness & sloth. It's not a coincidence that the Seven Deadly Sins in the Bible so closely match this list because religious writings are primarily intended to warn future generations of the pitfalls that will beset them. Even though the evolutionary stimulus of our biology is clear to any analysis, people will still deny them as major components of their own lives; we are all willingly blind to the things that are harmful to our own self-image; a voluntary lack of self-awareness, and probably a good thing we are.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-31_652_negative_emotions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-31_652_negative_emotions.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash negative emotion, envy, jealously, resentment, humor, politics no Sun, 08 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Psychiatrists aren't the only ones who should understand human weaknesses; let's review what we know: To be irrational is to make subjectively bad decisions. To be illogical is to make objectively bad decisions. We are all delusional but nobody will admit it. The Internet is a playground for sadists. Empathy is a form of masochism. Capitalism is the playground of sociopaths. Psychopaths are the blind spot of a liberal society. Nothing has encouraged narcissism like Instagram. Depression is facilitated by wealth. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-29_651_psychiatric_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-29_651_psychiatric_concepts.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash psychiatry, humor, politics no Fri, 06 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Depression is a symptom of affluence. People are evolved to get enjoyment from simple accomplishments, like having enough food to eat, evading a threat, or building shelter. When those things are provided without effort, it becomes more difficult to find individual purpose; and when child-bearing & rearing are also reduced, the lack of motivation becomes epidemic, as evidenced by the fact that a quarter of all women in their forties are taking prescription mood-enhancing drugs. Depression is a natural aspect of biology: high insulin levels from eating too much sugar, low dopamine levels from not getting enough sleep, and hormonal changes during menopause are just some examples. The swing from elation to despair and back goes on in everybody, some more than others. When the swing is too dramatic, a person's cognitive faculties are compromised to the point of mental illness, which means it impacts their decision-making. There's also non-pharmacological treatment: videogames are addictive because they provide the little successes that counteract depression, and hobbies are another effective solution; however, the push by some to go back to more primitive times is wishful thinking and naivete, though joining the Amish may be the answer for some.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-29_650_depression.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-29_650_depression.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash depression, humor, politics no Wed, 04 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy As prosperity has increased, narcissism has along with it. Narcissists think they are the Center-Of-The-Universe, just like the rest of us, but they take it to the extremes. Narcissism used to be frowned upon, garnering social censure; in fact, “Narcissistic Personality Disorder” is still considered a mental illness and describes how the disorder negatively impacts the patient, but with the rise of the Look-At-Me vanity culture, typified by Social Media like Instagram, it literally pays to be a narcissist. It's hard to go anywhere without seeing some overly made-up girl with a Selfie-stick preening in the background of all your photos. Ironically, though the true definition of narcissism now suffers no consequence, the word has become an Internet slur, conflated with pride; just mention your achievements or accomplishments online and see what happens; especially if you've done something that makes most people feel inadequate. Attaching the metal illness connotation of "narcissism" to highly successful vain people is just societal envy & resentment; however, being entrapped in the thrall of a true narcissist: the entitled, callous, self-centered greed, makes you understand why there is a biblical stricture against it.     Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-29_649_narcissism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-29_649_narcissism.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash narcissism, politics, humor no Mon, 02 Sep 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy A psychopath is unaware of the injury they inflict, or in the extreme case, their pleasure centers are triggered instead, motivating the psychopath to more heinous crimes. Psychopathy is corporeal in nature, meaning it's not due to a cognitive process; through some kind of maldevelopment or injury, the part of the brain, the Frontal lobe, that empathizes with the plights of others no longer operates. Liberty's greatest weakness is that it requires other people to act responsibly, which psychopaths do not. Unless there is some kind of medical breakthrough, society must be protected from psychopaths, but housing psychopaths in prisons for their entire lives is expensive; execution is out of the question because psychopaths have their own liberty; an “Escape From New York” scenario, where psychopaths are thrown together on an island is appealing but fantasy. If people are in fear of strangers, they cannot be free, so identifying psychopaths early is important for a liberal nation, but that can difficult because psychopaths learn to hide their proclivities. Unfortunately, at least one person in every large group is a psychopath: those are scary odds, and justification enough for The Second Amendment.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-20_648_psychopaths.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-08-20_648_psychopaths.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash psychopaths, psychopathy, humor, politics no Sat, 31 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Often when people describe sociopaths, they use the term “don't care,” as in "a sociopath doesn't care." Care about what? A sociopath is simply someone who makes a logical calculation of the benefit of their action versus the social penalty. A successful sociopath does not "care" whether they are shunned, scorned, or shamed, or any other kind of social ostracization, and consider people who do as fools & dupes. A sociopath wants a society where people make decisions for themselves and reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of their own actions. Essentially, Capitalists are sociopaths, as are people who believe in liberty. America can honestly be said to have been built by sociopaths. The people who find sociopaths appalling are the Group-Think types who are losers individually, and depend on societal penalties to reign in those who intimidate their own sense of self-value. For example, the Marxist Equality ideology, with its emphasis on egalitarianism, is the exact opposite of personal autonomy. When altruism and empathy are your ultimate goals, individuals looking out for themselves seems selfish, so it's easy to see why Marxists think liberty is evil.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-27_647_sociopaths.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-27_647_sociopaths.mp3 2:11 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sociopaths, humor, politics no Thu, 29 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy A masochist derives pleasure from their own pain, humiliation & mental anguish. Though it's commonly associated with sex, its biggest manifestation is among participants in the modern Victimhood culture; people who view their whole existence through a lens of mortification, and revel in guilt. In fact, a large portion of the population is shameful towards their own race, and are outraged by their history. They indulge in a litany of masochism, a cavalcade of self-hatred; tantrums on Social Media; woe-is-me and anybody who looks like me. It's actually a travesty because many of these vulnerable personalities have been pushed into clinical mental illness by the obscenely manipulative tactics of Mainstream News Media. But masochism is not a recognized mental disorder, and even seems to be encouraged in society's ever-increasing obsession with egalitarianism, altruism & empathy. However, it seems unhealthy from almost any other point-over-view, and people should seek treatment in the form of therapy, which tries to get the patient to recognize what they are doing and take responsibility for changing their actions. Unfortunately, or fortunately depending how you view personal liberty, masochists are obviously a perfect match for sadists, those who like to give pain, humiliation & mental anguish, so if both groups would just leave everyone else alone, it would be match made in Psychiatric heaven.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-25_646_masochism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-25_646_masochism.mp3 2:25 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash masochism, humor, politics no Tue, 27 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Sadists are people who get pleasure from inflicting suffering & humiliation on others; passive aggression, spite & perversity are their calling cards. In the past, sadism was a psychiatric condition but has since become mainstream; now a significant portion of humanity is sadistic, fueled by Social Media, which is a sadistic paradise: Internet trolls, the call-out culture, and Twitter are breeding grounds for sadists. Also, politics is full of sadists: from the commentators who live to tear down others, to the voters who don't just want that guy to lose the election, they want him destroyed personally too. Because people overlook their own emotional weaknesses, sadism goes undetected by the person exhibiting it, requiring a self-awareness most folks just don't have because our self-adsorption has increased along with our freedom. Sadism doesn't require dominance or power; in fact, the culture of Equality has allowed even the weakest among us to indulge their inner-sadism, and because they grew up at the mercy of other sadists, they have a whole lot of making up to do. There are more opportunities than ever for newly-empowered sadists to engorge themselves on the vulnerabilities of others.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-25_645_sadism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-25_645_sadism.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sadism, politics, humor no Sun, 25 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy A delusion is believing things that aren't true, so obviously we're all living in a delusion because most naive optimism is unjustified. Religion is another prime example: are you a reincarnated grasshopper? Does a spirit listen to your whispering and grant wishes? Are we all part of a oneness where rocks and plants are sentient on a galactic level? What are the odds that your religion is the right one, because if you’re right, billions of other people are delusional. Do we have Free Will or is that a delusion? There are many people who believe we are simply players in an artificial simulation that makes each of us the Center Of The Universe. Is it the people who believe those things who are delusional or the people who don't? Politics could possibly claim the Most Delusional prize: if you’re pure and the other side is evil, that’s half of everybody who are delusional, plus the other half too. Both sides explain that their differences come from lack of information; that given the same facts, everyone would come to the same conclusion, but it's glaringly apparent that we don't, and nobody seems to recognize this dichotomy; we all live in our delusions without admitting we are delusional. Self-awareness is recognizing that you are.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-23_644_delusional.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-23_644_delusional.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash delusional, delusions, humor, politics no Fri, 23 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The concept of rational comes from from the word “ratio,” which means when in someone's opinion something has a more positive than negative outcome, it's a rational choice; irrational would be the opposite of that. Since rationality is subjective, what is rational for one person's self-interest is probably irrational for someone else; that's why socialism, the ideal of doing the most good for the most people, is suspect as a method of making group decisions unless the group is highly homogeneous in its morals, values & beliefs. Most things that are rational are also logical because subjective goals can also be objectively true; for example, decisions based on knowledge, like when to mow the lawn, or how much money to save. It’s through a lack of facts or a biased interpretation that leads to rational but illogical conclusions: it may make rational sense to some people to sacrifice a goat to get their god's attention but it's illogical. Politics is certainly dominated by rational illogic. On the flip side, something can be irrational but logical: it's logical to spread wealth within a society, and it's rational to the people receiving the wealth, but it's irrational to the people losing their wealth. Also, everyone occasionally makes choices first then justify them afterwards, which is illogical and irrational.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-23_643_irrational.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-23_643_irrational.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash rational, irrational, logical, illogical, humor, politics no Wed, 21 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Logic is reasoning that produces a predictable outcome. Logic is the only practical means of predicting the future but logic requires facts, and if those are erroneous or not available, logic cannot be performed. To be illogical is to choose an answer other than what logic dictates. Socially, logic has a suspect reputation: Star Trek's Dr. Spock was logical which somehow conflicted with his emotions, even though emotions are the logical result of chemical interactions in your brain, and can logically explain how a conclusion was reached, even if that conclusion was illogical. This convoluted reasoning is logical but seems illogical, which shines a confusing light on logic. Logic isn’t something that’s valued in our society; in fact, it’s often demeaned as nerdy, exploitative, and heartless. Plus, in a Google world where everyone can be an expert in 5 minutes, facts are often wrong or ignored; confusing rational for logical, and it's logical they should do so. Why does this all seem so illogical? Because people don't understand their underlying natures, are blind to their own motivations, excuse themselves of their self-centered actions so simply don't have the facts required to be logical, because to deny truth is to deny logic.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-21_642_illogical.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-21_642_illogical.mp3 2:20 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash illogical, logic, truth, humor, politics no Mon, 19 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Feelings can always use review; let's do it: It's the chemical nature of feelings that motivates humans. Many interpersonal relationships are toxic to at least one of the participants. Responsibility gives men's lives meaning. Where you fall on the political spectrum depends on your balance between conscientiousness and altruism. Agreeableness and subservience are not the same but they overlap. Shame was invented to coerce people who wouldn't naturally do what you want. Most of life's instigators are some kind of extortion. Schadenfreude is one of the unacknowledged simple pleasures of life. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-21_641_feelings_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-21_641_feelings_concepts.mp3 2:02 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash feelings, humor, politics no Sat, 17 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Americans don't even have a word for the pleasure we derive from the misfortune of others, especially people we resent or otherwise identify as hypocrites. Luckily, the Germans are a more candid culture, not afraid to point out this opposite of altruism: “schadenfreude.” It just shows how reluctant people are to recognize their internal motivations, which is why self-awareness is such a rare thing, no one wants to think other people have to fail for themselves to be happy but, in reality, that's half the satisfaction we get from life. We build our own self-worth on the backs of those who have failed; without schadenfreude, how could we possibly overcome the resentment we feel towards those standing on our backs? “He has a big house and is better looking but my house and hair are a lot better than my neighbor's.” In the past, our religious teachings told us to beware such feelings, probably because it leads to societal destabilization, but now there's no bounds, only a growing Grievance industry, and their solution is to make everyone fail; equal schadenfreude for all.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-21_640_schadenfreude.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-21_640_schadenfreude.mp3 2:02 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash schadenfreude, politics, humor no Thu, 15 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Extortion is one of those words that immediately gets folk's attention. Extortion is coercion. When people first think of extortion, the legal definition comes to mind: price-gouging, black-mail, or to avoid negative consequences, such as euphemistic “protection,” which really means abeyance from harm, but extortion is often also part of receiving an essential service, such as a building permit or job application. In political circles, extortion is the essence of corruption, exploiting an official's position via influence peddling. Actually, extortion is much bigger than any of that; we live in a world where extortion, don't do what I say or something bad will happen to you, is a regular part of life, especially in personal relationships, certainly within a family. The most common weapons used to extort are mocking, scorn & ridicule, plus there are less obvious extortive behaviors, such as withholding information, passive aggressiveness, and shunning. The personal aspects of extortion don't even require any real threat, only the implication. These threats may seem harmless from a legal point of view but they have a huge impact on the victim's psyche; and they obviously work, because most people will do almost anything when extorted, because life doesn't need to get any worse.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-19_639_extortion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-19_639_extortion.mp3 2:07 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash extortion, politics, humor no Tue, 13 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Shame is an extremely powerful motivator, and a very effective means of control. Creatures are not born with shame, even humans; it must be taught. If there is no taboo in a society against an action then people don't feel guilty engaging in it; for example, without cultural restriction, people don't feel guilty engaging in underage sex; and a culture can evolve its morals, ethics & values; for example, homosexuality is no longer shameful. Shame is defined by the generation. Society decides what is shameful then uses it as a weapon against its members. Shame becomes a penalty: being labeled a Racist because of who you vote for, called selfish for not donating to charity, a checkmark on a job application if you are a felon. When rulers want to consolidate their power, they cynically indoctrinate shame into those under their thrall, usually in the from of morals: paying taxes, joining the military, and various duties to God. But shame is simply a contrived feeling, which makes it your choice how it affects you. There are many people that are actually positively reinforced by feeling shame; they wallow in it, they want to wear the hair-shirt and don sack-cloth & ashes. It's these people who promote intergenerational shame in the form of Social Justice.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-19_638_shame.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-19_638_shame.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash shame, humor, politics no Sun, 11 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Clinical Psychologist, Jordan Peterson, includes the concept of “agreeableness” in his explanation of human personality. It's an awkward term with a weak meaning, but seems to indicate that an agreeable person is willing to sacrifice personal gain and even truth in order to avoid conflict. These people therefore do better in environments that require supplication, like schooling and rote office jobs. In a competitive society, agreeableness would seem to be a disadvantage. The Pop-psychology aspects of whether agreeableness is a good or bad thing would explain many coffee house ramblings. Women, Peterson says, have higher agreeableness than men. Why might that be the case? Perhaps men's higher testosterone incites competitiveness, rejecting authority and instruction. It could also be cultural: women have a history of being subservient to men due to strength and concern for their children's well-being. We could endlessly speculate on the impact of so-called agreeableness, but the one place where it would really make a difference would be the political ramifications because it correlates with ideology, and is probably why the Democratic Party is dominated by women, which doesn't seem very agreeable at all.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-17_637_agreeableness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-17_637_agreeableness.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash agreeableness, humor, politics no Fri, 09 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There are two inheritable attributes that define a person's ideological outlook: conscientiousness & altruism. The two attributes do not correlate, meaning one does not depend on the other, instead everyone has a mixture, and whichever trait predominates tends the person to either individualism for conscientious people, or collectivism for the altruistic ones. Society, civilization, and even continuation of the species apparently requires both: conscientious people can survive stranded on a desert island, while altruistic people comfort the dying and raise children. Conscientious people reward merit, while altruistic people promote equality. In a political setting, a conscientious candidate would recognize that it takes money to run a campaign and plan accordingly, while altruistic people complain that The Rich have an advantage because the amount of money is unequal. Frankly, I want a conscientious person in a position of power over me and making decisions on my behalf, but there is the real risk that, conscientiously-speaking, that person may be looking out for themselves and not so much for me. At least altruistic people suffer the same consequences as their constituents from making poor decisions.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-17_636_conscientiousness__altruism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-07-17_636_conscientiousness__altruism.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash conscientiousness, altruism, politics, humor no Wed, 07 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Evolutionary, women ensured survival by bearing children, and in modern times they still have control over reproduction. This overarching biological advantage gives women purpose regardless of what is happening in their personal lives, and they take solace in that whether they are actually the ones having the children or not; it's their meaning of life. Men, on-the-other-hand, have no such biologically epic role; the only meaning available to men is the assumption of responsibility towards the child, to the woman, to the family, to the clan. The difference between men and boys is that men are defined by the challenges they must overcome to obtain responsible positions in life. Without responsibility, men do not mature, they remain in limbo: more than children, less than adults; forever playing, pursing impulsive pleasures, and they end up despising themselves. Their lives become meaningless and psychologically stressed so they choose the escape of drugs and nihilism. Modern life is simply not compatible with the evolutionary demands that created men: aggression, ambition, competitiveness & protection were developed for a primeval time but the times have changed and the reason for men hasn't caught up yet.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-26_635_mens_responsibility.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-26_635_mens_responsibility.mp3 2:12 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash responsibility, men, politics, humor no Mon, 05 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Our personal relationships with other people are dictated by mostly unacknowledged motives that require self-awareness to recognize and comprehend. One glaring example that no one ever seems to notice is that the nuclear family is at its essence, Marxist: strong authoritarian leaders, from those according to their ability to those according to their need, equality. In fact, your family members think you owe them: the biggest culprits are your siblings, followed by your parents; even your grown children can be guilty. To some extent, even your acquaintances also have this attitude, which makes relationships fraught with unvoiced resentments, envy & anger. Spouses are excused because you made an explicit contract with them that indeed means you do owe them. This spiderweb of implied obligation originates from everyone's natural self-centeredness, the profound belief that we, every one of us, is the center of the universe and everyone else exists only insofar as they benefit us. If you don't recognize that this is what is going on then you can be captured in the thrall of someone else; become their enabler and servant rather than pursuing goals that are best for you. Instead you’ve got to keep your relationships symbiotic rather than parasitic. You owe it to yourself not to be held in emotional blackmail, especially like a family member can exert. Sometimes the only solution is distance and proscribed contact; separation does indeed make the heart grow fonder.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-26_634_toxic_relationships.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-26_634_toxic_relationships.mp3 2:37 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash toxic relationships, relationships, politics, humor no Sat, 03 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Feelings are nothing more than chemical reactions in your brain due to hormones & neuropeptides: serotonin is soothing, dopamine is a high, adrenalin is excitement, female lust and altruism comes from oxytocin; endorphins assuage pain; and BDNF (Brain Derived Neurotropic Factor) magnifies them all. There's also the ever-important testosterone which brings ambition, aggression, anger and a lot more. The euphoric feeling you get during a good workout is from the norepinephrine produced when burning fat. MCH (Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin) is a pheromone; women can smell it, and interestingly enough, it's why opposites attract. These chemicals are where feelings come from and are what motivate humans. Feelings obviously contribute evolutionary, otherwise we wouldn't have them. Unfortunately, since feelings are biological and not logical, they must be held in suspicion, especially in a stable social setting where they end up becoming more important than rationality. When someone else's feelings affect your personal autonomy that becomes a problem because what someone else feels should not dictate your actions. For example, the intense desire to be in control is a feeling; as are envy, anger & lust, all of which must be kept subsumed to rationality, except of course, to save the species, which is why feelings are the way they are.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-25_633_feelings.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-25_633_feelings.mp3 2:34 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash feelings, neuropeptides, humor, politics no Thu, 01 Aug 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the concepts around what makes you a person: Fate is what happens to people who don't make decisions for themselves. Determinism is when intelligent people are sucked into fortune-telling. To balance risk perfectly is the goal of wisdom. When God dictates all, wealth or poverty is simply manifestations of Divine Reward, and shouldn't be trifled with. Self-reliance is an integral part of liberty, but you should already know that. Ingenuity is the secret ingredient of humanity's success. Sitting in a field of flowers contemplating the human condition is what makes you human. Enlightenment leads to self-awareness. Frustration is the origin of patience. You must maintain your infallibility, otherwise you are responsible. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-25_632_personal_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-25_632_personal_concepts.mp3 2:17 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash contemplation, determinism, fate, self-reliance, frustration, infallibility, humor, politics no Tue, 30 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy What should be considered a weakness, not admitting when you are wrong, has been turned on its head by the penalty if you do so. The reason for the infallibility trap is the inability to admit an error without penalty: social or monetary. Anybody, anywhere, for anything, can claim they are offended and will take control by exploiting the leverage given to them by someone apologizing. No one can say “I'm sorry” without threat of a lawsuit. The consequence of infallibility is that you must pretend to be sure of everything; that every decision you make, and everything you do or have ever done is the absolute correct thing. In fact, to admit that you aren't sure is considered a lack of character. This has lead to the cult of infallibility; the idea that no one can be excused for any act at any time in their life; that you have been and always will be the exact same person; you cannot change. Our politics is thoroughly infected with the infallible malady; every candidate must be a beacon of false confidence, to our detriment. It's easy to see why there are a whole lot of people out there with a raging I-know-better-than-you hardon.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-25_631_infallibility.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-25_631_infallibility.mp3 2:11 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash infallibility, humor, politics no Sun, 28 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy High-order creatures are subject to frustration, the thwarting of their desires by outside forces. Even the most sage & savvy individuals can be frustrated to distraction if the conditions are right; sometimes it even seems like a malevolent presence is working against you. Frustration can lead to rage; it's a common cause of brutality among chimpanzees, when frustrated members of a tribe vent their anger on those weaker than themselves; people do this too. On the flip side, how many achievements of our ancestors were the result of frustrated ambitions that morphed into something else? One of the positive aspects of frustration is that it develops patience; laugh and release the tension, or get angry and achieve nothing. It's also an indication of maturity, a sanguine acceptance that most plans fail at the first opportunity. How a person responds to frustration will determine whether or not they succeed in their life's ambitions because it easily turns into resignation and abandonment of the goal; or it can become perseverance, manifested as stubbornness. Wisdom is knowing which strategy to pursue.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-24_630_frustration.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-24_630_frustration.mp3 2:04 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash frustration, humor, politics no Fri, 26 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In the West, enlightenment is closely tied to self-awareness, comprehension of your own motivations. However, in Eastern religious doctrine, enlightenment is the casting off of indoctrination and conditioning, going so far as to discourage the acquisition of knowledge, as a way of escaping the propaganda that is ubiquitous in life. Their intent is an attempt to supersede the basic emotions with intellectual emotions, which puts Eastern enlightenment in direct conflict with Western enlightenment, though to be fair, Eastern practitioners do allow that knowledge can be used discreetly when appropriate. Enlightenment is a purely human trait: dogs and gorillas give little thought to what motivates them to eat, rut, or fight. Many people don't either, which is why where enlightenment comes from is so difficult to determine. It seems to be tied to mental capacity, not just person-to-person, but within the same person, who sometimes can overcome their base motivations, but often slip back into old evolutionary habits: getting angry, exerting dominance, coveting the wife of a neighbor. In fact, these activities are celebrated in modern tabloid magazines which wallow in unenlightenment. There seems to a race on, to become more enlightened or less so, and it's difficult to tell who's winning.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-24_629_enlightenment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-24_629_enlightenment.mp3 2:10 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash enlightenment, politics, humor no Wed, 24 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Contemplation and self-awareness are closely related, and may even be poetically the same thing. To contemplate life is to examine your place within it in relation to the places of others; and hopefully, to try and understand their motives and your own. Contemplation only works when you have a great deal of input to contemplate, the wider the better, that's why experience is important because without it, people will fill in the holes with mysticism. Mystics specialize in contemplation, which has kind of tainted concept: sitting alone in a cave on a mountain top for twenty years has no value to anyone, especially not to yourself, yet the conclusions these people make have influenced tens of millions of people: religion, metaphysics, all forms of navel-gazing. Contemplation is valuable: you must re-examine your life on a regular basis to see if the reality fits the expectations. Since planning is essentially predicting the future, you have to check regularly to see how close you are; in most cases adjustments need to be made, and often you must accept failure and make a new plan, usually through contemplation. There's also a mental health aspect of contemplation; take time to enjoy what's around you: nature, your family, your successes; achievement and accomplishments don't mean anything if you don't take time to contemplate them.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-13_628_contemplation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-13_628_contemplation.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash contemplation, humor, politics no Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There are whole swaths of human history where seemingly nothing happened, at least in what we can glean from archaeology and historical records, compared against times where empires flourished and pyramids were built. We can only look at examples of the two extremes today to determine why there is a difference, and the best word that describes it is ingenuity, the ability to propose solutions for problems then follow through. What motivates people to be ingenious could be anything from base desires, like greed and lust, to altruism, like love, but you've got to admire the results. Where does ingenuity come from? Is it inherited or is it learned? What are the circumstances that encourage and support ingenuity? Does technology hinder or promote ingenuity? Looking around the world today, some cultures appear industrious; is that ingenuity? There is the old saying that “ingenuity is the mother of invention.” Who's doing the inventing? Unfortunately, a robust belief in human ingenuity seems to be in direct conflict with the prevailing Victimhood culture, but perhaps that too is just another manifestation of it?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-13_627_ingenuity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-13_627_ingenuity.mp3 2:08 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash ingenuity, humor, politics no Sat, 20 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The natural ideology of man is akin to socialism; some elite decision-maker determines what is best for everyone: the head of the family, the king, a council of elders. The contrary ideology, one only found after civilization could satisfy its basic needs through working together, was personal autonomy, where people decide for themselves and reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of their own actions, what we call liberty today. Self-Reliance is based on the premise that you can be the master of your own destiny, and that no one and no thing can be trusted to protect your best interests. Children must be taught self-reliance when young, very young: explore, don't be afraid, do it yourself; then the education must be continuous throughout their formative years. This creates mature adults who can make their own way in life; be leaders of society rather than followers. Unfortunately, exactly the opposite is happening: helicopter parents do everything for their children, and worse, train them to take orders from elite decision-makers. The non-adults that result have no imagination, and certainly don't have the personal tools to be creative; frightened of everything, always waiting for someone else to go first. It's not a coincidence that the history of a nation starts at its most self-reliant and ends at its least.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-11_626_self-reliance.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-11_626_self-reliance.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash self reliance, self-reliance, humor, politics no Thu, 18 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Religious people believe that even if they are not rewarded now for their good works, they will be rewarded later in life, or in afterlife, by some divine power. This belief naturally extends to them thinking that financially successful people are benefiting for similar reasons, meaning they must have deserved it in some way, either them directly, or their parents did something reward-worthy. This concept fits very well into the acceptance of fate. Naturally, those who believe in fate and divine oversight have no problem with a Class system, where some people are born into their roll as a servant, while others are their masters; it's all part of God's plan, and there's no reason to change such a system because it is God's intent. Churches have used this logic to maintain control of the masses, and it can be traced back throughout history, at least to the Egyptians. The Enlightenment, when people began striving for personal autonomy, escaping the thrall of divine reward, instead accepting that people reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of their own actions, an important component of personal autonomy, the very definition of liberty.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-11_625_divine_reward.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-11_625_divine_reward.mp3 2:00 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash devine reward, humor, politics no Tue, 16 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Risk implies the odds of a negative consequence. You don't say, “the risk of becoming a millionaire,” but you don't want the risk of going broke. Stripping off that distinction, risk is simply the probability of something you don't want to happen. Even animals calculate risk to some degree, maybe not with the clarity that humans do, but tigers do not attack elephants unless the chance of starvation outweighs the possibility of being trampled to death. It's interesting that if fate were real then risk would be inconsequential; but if determinism were real, risk, or the odds of an event occurring, would be the most important variable in your life. Determining the odds is what separates somewhat lucky people from the super lucky people. Because most people don't like the stress that risk brings, they try to find others to make decisions for them, which is attractive to ideologies that ignore personal responsibility; those people want someone else responsible for the risks they take. This completely ignores the risk of such a strategy: any ideology that makes individual choice subservient to another, means you are risking they will exploit their power and authority; this is a gamble without knowing the odds, the very definition of maximum risk.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-09_624_risk.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-09_624_risk.mp3 2:10 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash risk, humor, politics no Sun, 14 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There are many smart people alive today who believe that our individual choices in life are overwhelmed by a kind of fate because our bodies are organic robots and therefore predictable in a probabilistic way. All human action is predicated on the peptides in our brains; control the peptides, control what a person thinks and does. Extrapolating this chemical programability: since computer programs are deterministic, so too must be the organic robot they are riding around in. This leads to the idea that a highly enough developed being, knowing the probability of each micro-transaction involved in a situation, can accurately predict the outcome of a civilization, and even the outcome of a single person, making all history predictable. In this context, God would simply be a highly enough developed being; and your destiny can be exactly mapped, no matter what choices you may be making in life, because those have all been included in the simulation. The fallacy of this thinking has long been identified in economics: complex systems cannot be predicted because the number of possible outcomes is infinite. The actual outcome of infinite options is best explained by the concept of Emergent Order; a wait-and-see epistemology; no one can predict, but wise people can observe and modify plans as they go.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-09_623_determinism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-09_623_determinism.mp3 2:18 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash determinism, humor, politics no Fri, 12 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Most people in the past, and still many today, especially the successful ones, think their successes were preordained, as a reward for acts in a previous life perhaps, or as an answer to prayers, and there is little they can do to change it; their fate is sealed. This makes life simple indeed: rich people must deserve their fate just as much as the poor; there is no reason to prepare, and no reason to be conscientious, because nothing anybody can do will change anything. This is a mighty handy concept if serfs are expected to work hard and die young, and kings are to be afforded the right of divine power by the gods themselves. The concept of fate was held for much of world history, only denied in the last few Centuries, most notably by Nietzsche's famous quote, “God is dead,” which means that people control their own destinies and God has little to do with it. In fact, luck contributes most to a person's path through life, and luck is the opposite of fate. Still, those who despair, and those who cannot compete, find refuge in God and in fate; and there is a modern re-emergence of fate in the concept that we each live in our own simulation.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-07_622_fate.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-07_622_fate.mp3 2:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Fate, humor, politics no Wed, 10 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Why is intelligence so stupid? Let's review: Defining intelligence is actually much more difficult than first appears. Polymaths, people who are master of all things, are more fairytale than reality. The prevalence of stupidity verges on overwhelming competent people. Testing someone else's IQ always seems to be a better idea than testing your own. Improbable accomplishments makes you suspect there are such things as Meta humans. You can gain wisdom by pursuing the components of wisdom. False confidence comes from thinking the Internet knows all. Expertise is not rare nor is it difficult to replace but it is important to have. To deny authority is to invite authoritarianism. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-07_621_intelligence_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-07_621_intelligence_concepts.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash intelligence, stupidity, IQ, humor, politics no Mon, 08 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy One of the most surprising divides between ideologies, liberty versus Marxism, is the denial that authority exists. Doctors, lawyers, teachers, religious leaders, even parents, are obliged no special dispensation for their knowledge and achievements in a Marxist society, where everyone is equal and the obligation is on talented individuals to provide for the less so. People gain absolutely no advantage for being competent, the opposite in fact because they are then at the mercy of those who forsake ambition. The disdain of the masses for the accomplished leads naturally to disdain and even denial of authority; no one is more qualified than anyone else to give advice or provide direction. The resulting society encourages thought-policing to keep people from offending anyone else which leads to discouraging anyone striving for excellence. The Left’s contempt for police and soldiers is a direct result of this anti-authority attitude. Mostly it occurs among the young and immature, but unsuccessful, envious adults are enablers. Unfortunately, it's human nature, and all societies flirt with the concept as the numbers of people who feel like losers increase, perhaps a third of the population. In all cases of authority denial, soon a dictator arises, one who denounces authority but none-the-less assumes it, and the anti-authoritarians become ruled by an authoritarian.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-05_620_authority.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-05_620_authority.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash authority, humor, politics no Sat, 06 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Everybody's an expert at what they do, or at least thinks they are, and it's true: anybody who's been doing a job for 2 years is more expert than any new straight-A college graduate. Unfortunately, the competence that comes from doing something repeatedly gives a false sense of confidence when people think what they do is special, making them assume they are difficult to replace, but the reality is that any job has 10,000 people who could perform it just as well, and 10x that number given a minimum of training. There's also the awkward situation when you realize you're more competent than the expert you've hired: courtesy makes it difficult to tell them so; that plus a bit of cowardliness and you end up paying for something you could have done better yourself. Also, claiming expertise is considered boorish behavior, but to let an undistinguished hack insinuate themselves above you in the chain of command by doing just, is even worse; which is why competitive people, men especially, will deny the expertise of others while claiming unjustified superiority for themselves. Apparently there is no happy medium somewhere between under-performance and overconfidence.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-07_619_experts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-07_619_experts.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash experts, humor, politics no Thu, 04 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Of all the positives things the Internet has brought, one of the more insidious problems is the prevalence of self-proclaimed experts, and everybody thinks their opinion is just as valuable as anyone else's; just Google it, no expertise required. This has also led to a disdain for advanced degrees and professional licenses; who needs those, the Internet is more expert than any person could possibly be. Information is truly free, and intelligence only requires you begin the sentence with “hey, siri.” Consider how it works: you have a sudden insight about the earth being flat; you Google "flat earth" and hundreds of other people appear supporting your thinking; you must be a genius! Any argument, any position, who needs to listen to anybody, the Internet is your wingman. This has led to a generation of false confidence, of foolish people convinced they are wise, of an inability to consider that you might be wrong. The hierarchy of knowledge has dissolved; there is no one anyone will take advice from; leading to an ever-declining lack of wisdom; the anachronistic irony of unlimited knowledge is that common sense is not so common anymore.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-05_618_false_confidence.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-05_618_false_confidence.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash false confidence, confidence, Internet, humor, politics no Tue, 02 Jul 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's say one of your life goals was to be wise, how would you do that? Would you climb to a mountain top and sit at the feet of a guru; someone who didn't bath, and spent all day contemplating their navel? That doesn't sound very wise. Would you read all the works of the great philosophers; people who were often in debt, and whose family lives were in turmoil? That seems even more unwise. Popular culture, with its allure of tenuous fads & status, isn't wise at all. Of course, anything that leads to frustration, depression & mental illness should be immediately abandoned as anti-wisdom. Imagine all of the possible experiences in life as a pie, and every slice is a bit of wisdom, the whole pie makes a wise man. You would want a slice of medical knowledge & experience, and to know the law; you would want to have been an entrepreneur and a scientist. But the pie of life is much more than technical knowledge & intelligence; there's the creativity slices like art, sports & philosophy. Also, traveling to meet new people and cultures. And let's not forget the crust: the everyday aspects of family, fame, civil contribution, leadership ability, a good personality, wealth & a satisfying career. Wisdom just isn't that hard to measure in slices; you'd think more people would like pie?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-03_617_gaining_wisdom.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-03_617_gaining_wisdom.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash wise, wisdom, gaining wisdom, politics, humor no Sun, 30 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In the spectrum of human achievements, some people's success can only be explained through amazing luck, or something we don't quite understand. Folks have always recognized this, and have attributed these extremes to "grace of God," or some other mystical aspect like karma. If you aren't a believer, if you are a science person, then how do you explain Donald Trump? "Meta" is as good a word as any; it has a long history in terms like metaphysics, and certainly has been explored extensively in comic lore; but is it real? And how would you recognize if someone was a "Meta"? Perhaps they can be identified by the number of things they're good at, or by their inexplicable success? A Meta is a level of awareness and all-round intellectual capability that people don't currently possess outside of imaginative stories. It's problematic to call historical figures Meta: Benjamin Franklin seems like a good bet, but notable people like Isaac Newton, though he was certainly admirable, a cursory examination of his life in unconvincing. Modern-day Metas are even more controversial to try and identify: Elon Musk? Richard Branson? Dr. Dre and p-diddy stand out as incomprehensibly successful; what about them? There's probably even a Meta or two at the top of large crime syndicates. Just mentioning the Meta concept gets a lot of people's hackles up, triggering some deep-seated psychological insecurity. For others, Metas are fun to talk about but impossible to say.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-03_616_metas.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-03_616_metas.mp3 2:29 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash meta, humor, politics no Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy IQ is short for Intelligence Quotient, and purports to signify how smart someone is. Historically, IQ is obtained by dividing a person's mental age by their true age; 100 is average, meaning mental age is the same as physical age. IQ tests were original designed for children for placement into educational settings, and young draftees into the military. Its use on adults is highly questionable. Unfortunately, it seems IQ doesn't increase but does goes down as people age. Its use in early eugenics literature has tainted the concept almost beyond usefulness. Whether any test can accurately measure someone's intelligence is an issue of intense debate, most calling it biased. Certainly, some of the questions on the IQ test are education oriented: for example, which country on the map is Greece? Most questions are not: repeat this series of 20 numbers, and put these puzzles together. Any IQ measure above 130 is highly suspect: first, the takers are usually under-18, so the trivia questions can be gamed; second, there is quite a bit of eye-hand coordination in putting together the puzzles and they’re timed and the pieces have to be touching; that's a lot of variability with nothing to do with intelligence and can be practiced. IQ is fun to talk about but seems to have no practical purpose.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-01_615_iq_tests.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-01_615_iq_tests.mp3 2:22 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash IQ, IQ test, humor, politics no Wed, 26 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Calling someone stupid has never been acceptable, and it certainly isn't now in our hyper-sensitive society, but that doesn't mean that stupid people went anywhere. Stupidity is usually defined as having less intellectual capability than everyone else. Autistic people can be smart and still have low emotional intelligence, which is an important part of the package. Stupid people have to be specially provided for in a functioning modern society; this can cost a lot of time and money, and unfortunately, the numbers are huge; at least the bottom quarter of the population needs help, tens of millions of people. How much of an impact stupidity has on a society depends on the underlying ideology: focus on the most talented, as with liberty and Capitalism, which encourages progress, or focus on the least, as with Marxism and socialism, which would slow life down to a stand-still. There's also a cultural component: in an Identity Politics hierarchy, where people are accorded benefits depending on what group they are in: race, sex, disability, etc.; stupidity is NOT one of those groups, so stupid people only get attention after all the special people are taken care of. Stupidity is a much larger burden on society than folks realize; how much is too much is a fatal question?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-01_614_stupidity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-06-01_614_stupidity.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash stupidity, humor, politics no Mon, 24 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy A polymath is a person who is excellent at several things: usually combinations like science, art & exploration; or sports, philosophy & math, and sometimes all of those. There were actually times in history when a polymath, also known as a Renaissance Man, could know all human knowledge, limited as it was; and everybody who looked could discover something new on their own. In the past, the more things a person knew, the more wisdom they were assumed to have, and the polymath was held in high acclaim; but in modern times an odd irony has emerged that a person's competency is assumed to diminish as the breath of their knowledge expands. As humanity accumulated more-and-more knowledge, specialists developed, taking the shine off polymath generalists. Now our society only really allows you to be an expert in one or two things, after which they denigrate you. This is irrational, obviously something psychological: people are envious & resentful of those who in comparison make them feel insignificant; one expertise you're allowed, but more than that, you're a self-centered dilettante who takes opportunities from other people who could do the job better. One must now buck the tide of spite & perversity to become a polymath even though it's insanely more difficult than anytime in history.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-30_613_polymath.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-30_613_polymath.mp3 2:16 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash polymath, renaissance man, humor, politics no Sat, 22 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Intelligence is a word that has no real meaning, or perhaps the old meaning has been lost to new priorities. Intelligence can't even be predicted accurately because intelligence is related to success in life but success is never guaranteed. Also, since people respond to different stimuli, a person's innate intelligence may remain undeveloped; for example, whether someone does well in school plays a huge role in the trajectory of their lives, but unfortunately, the beehive education we all receive is not for everyone, and intelligent people, especially males, are often left uncultivated. Also, intelligence is contextual: traditionally, in the realms of industry, science & business, IQ was an indicator of success; but in the world that's portrayed in the media: cars, sex & image, then social awareness might be what's important. Looking in garages, on farms, in the military, skills might be the measurement; and if you search the churches, the ashram, or the commune, then emotions might be the most important ingredient of intelligence; and even looking on the streets, in the Old Folks Homes, in the sanitariums, then mental Heath is the intelligence's predictor. The truth is you could easily be a smart dumb person.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-30_612_intelligence.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-30_612_intelligence.mp3 2:15 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash intelligence, humor, politics no Thu, 20 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review what people think about goals: It doesn't make any difference how they get it, people are admired for their money. Achievement is what you plan to do then do it. Other people care about your wealth; achievements are for yourself. Nothing surpasses fame for the attention of other people. Better to be rich & famous than accomplished. The winners we idolize now come from all over the world but there are a lot fewer of them. When there's only one winner, everybody else is a Loser. People consider no one wise since they suspect themselves foolish. No one can claim to be a Self-Made Man anymore. Lazarus Long was the hero of Baby Boomer boys. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-28_611_goals_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-28_611_goals_concepts.mp3 2:24 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash achievement, wealth, riches, fame, wisdom, humor, politics no Tue, 18 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Out of the halls of literature emerges science fiction writer Robert Heinlein's alter-ego, Lazarus Long, a man that stays young forever and knows everything. He was an actor, musician, beggar, farmer, priest, pilot, politician, con artist, gambler, doctor, lawyer, banker, merchant, soldier, electronics technician, mechanic, restaurateur, investor, bordello manager and slave. The novels in which Lazarus Long appears are intended for young adults, particularly males, and present an image all boys in the middle of the last Century admired, and some strived for. Back when Lazarus Long was popular, men walking on the moon seemed obvious and glorious; when knowledge was king and experience sought after. Attempting to emulate Lazarus Long requires a lifetime of advanced education, experience & travel; something that only the Baby Boom generation had the opportunity to pursue. Also indicative of the time he was written, Long is a rugged individualist with a distrust of authority; subsequent generations do not find Lazarus Long so appealing since Collectivism and equality are the up-and-coming ideology. As it turned out, Lazarus Long was not immortal.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-28_610_lazarus_long.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-28_610_lazarus_long.mp3 2:13 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Lazarus Long, Robert Heinlein, politics, humor no Sun, 16 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There is a lot of animosity towards the term “self-made man” by people who haven't made anything themselves. In fact, former president Obama famously said, “you didn't make that.” What he meant was that it takes a society to walk on the moon, but people on The Left interrpret it as meaning you are no better than anyone else, we are all equal, and what you do personally is inconsequential at best and probably selfish. Of course, it's the prevailing success of Marxist ideology, the equalist doctrine, that makes such envy, resentment & pervsity acceptable. The irony is the term, “Self-Made Men,” came from an 1859 lecture by Frederick Douglass, a Black man. The self-made man archetype is someone from a humble background who climbs the social ladder through hard work, morals, and education. Self-improvement is the overarching theme, but the word “man” immediately sets off alarm bells of the Identitarians who reject gender labels, and think any success by males is more a result of priviledge than anything accomplished by the protagonist. Ambition is no longer fashionable.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-28_609_self-made_man.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-28_609_self-made_man.mp3 2:04 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash self-made men, self-made man, humor, politics no Fri, 14 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Wisdom is knowledge, experience & self-awareness, the more the wiser. It seems logical that wise people would be admired but they are usually dismissed as being too educated or too focused on their work. It's odd that there are lots of fictional wise characters or wise people from the past, but few people alive today that are considered wise. In fact, the word “wisdom” is rarely even used anymore, instead “common sense” serves in its stead because everyone likes to think they have common sense but no one wants to think there might be someone wiser than themselves. Many people consider wisdom to be a combination of fame & money, or in the case of the religion; fame & morality. Foolish people, and there's a lot of them, think a belief in their ideology is a prerequisite to wisdom: Democrat or Republican becomes the determining factor. A “wise” person is someone you'll take advice from but most people don't ask for advice, and wouldn't follow it anyway; that's because people perceive that wisdom only offers real value when you can get rich or famous from it. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-26_608_dismissing_wisdom.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-26_608_dismissing_wisdom.mp3 2:03 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash wisdom, politics, humor no Wed, 12 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Not so long ago, every community had the best athlete, the smartest student, the noted traveler, the accomplished musician, the successful business, but now in the interconnected world community, everyone knows there's 10,000 kids in China that can play the piano better, run faster, and easily multiply two 10-digit numbers in their head. This drastically reduces the chances of anybody being the recognized best in anything, hollowing out the pride & striving that used to define America; essentially turning everyone into losers. That would only be a quirk of civilization if it wasn't so tied into evolutionary biology: social hierarchies are made up of winners, with losers on the bottom. With all the winners somewhere else, the physiological advantages that comes with it is lost, but the stress on health due to being a loser is everywhere because losing has the biological side-effect of dumping cortisol into your body, a hormone that depresses testosterone, essentially effeminizing males. There's also a mental health aspect that directly affects confidence & decision-making. Being a loser is more than a joke, it's a concept, a toxic state of mind that makes modern society a Loser too.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-26_607_losers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-26_607_losers.mp3 2:15 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash losers, winners, humor, politics no Mon, 10 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy People have always made idols of their actors, musicians, sports stars and military heroes; it's something they wish they could do themselves, so they strive towards those goals with no resentment against the people who have already obtained them, along with the dream of meeting your idol when you finally succeed yourself. There's a lot of romance around being a winner; we give the lucky ones magical names like: titan, marvel, whiz kid, wonderkind, phenom, etc. They get written up in magazines and speak at fundraisers. When they're in town, the local newspaper writes about them. The most attractive thing about winning is the fame. The desire to become a winner, to get rich & famous through being the best at something, has awkwardly skewed expectations and priorities, causing people to take more risks: “fortune favors the bold,” "bet the farm," "win big or sleep in the streets;” but now with our connected world, to be the best at something means being best-in-the-world, even greatest-of-all-time; that combined with a second-place-is-the-first-loser attitude obviously makes everyone but the very best, losers.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-24_606_idolizing_winners.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-24_606_idolizing_winners.mp3 2:14 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash winners, losers, idols, humor, politics no Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy People admire the rich because everyone also wants to be rich: the more wealth, the more admiration, and contact with a rich person could turn into reward for yourself: a job maybe, or inclusion in the Will. Unfortunately, only people who are currently rich get adulation; if a formerly wealthy person becomes destitute, they are pitied, and certainly have no entourage nor lingering credibility. In comparison, people respect the famous as well as admire them because contact with a famous person could turn into status for themselves. Status helps acquire better sex partners, more invitations to parties, and better seats in a restaurant. Once famous, always famous, and the amount of fame is immaterial past a certain level because even semi-fame brings untoward rewards. Contrast being rich or famous against the fact that people with accomplishments offer no personal gain to others, quite the opposite really, they have devalued those around them in comparison. Achievement is a solitary pursuit, easily cast as selfish, plus doing things is hard. Achievement is only for you. Being rich beats decades of effort and the difficulty of earning advanced degrees, gaining experience & licensing. If you are under the impression that achievement means something to others, stop trying now and just make more money, hopefully getting famous in the meantime.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-24_605_admire_the_rich__respect_the_famous.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-24_605_admire_the_rich__respect_the_famous.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash rich, famous, achievement, humor, politics no Thu, 06 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The only thing more socially powerful than wealth is fame: people admire fame over all else, and are attracted to famous people because fame rubs off: if you have your picture taken with a famous person, that makes you somewhat famous. This is why famous people can attract a crowd without paying them to be there, and why famous people do well in politics. Also, fame is often conflated with wisdom: ask someone to list wise people and it will instead be famous people; similarly, political utterances by famous people, no matter how insipid, are taken as credible and astute; and the most famous person is considered to be the most qualified person. Essentially, unless you’re famous, you’re nobody. On the down side: when people both rich and famous were asked which they would choose if they could only have one, they chose money because fame brings unwanted attention along with it; apparently, there is a level of fame so intense that only narcissists can survive long in its glare. However, everyone still wants to be famous. Caution: don't get confused that all fame is equal; unlike wealth, it does make a difference how you get famous; though similar notoriety does go to infamous, infamy brings none of the benefits of fame, only the detriments.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-22_604_fame.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-22_604_fame.mp3 2:27 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash fame, humor, politics no Tue, 04 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Anybody can be rich: take the lowliest beggar and give them a winning lottery ticket, and they'll be a multi-millionaire tomorrow. There are no fixed steps to becoming rich: tens of thousands of people try the same thing but only the lucky ones get to be. You can just as easily lose your wealth at any time, so it's not a negative reflection on you if you're not rich. This means somebody else's wealth does not affect your status so it doesn't trigger your envy & resentment. On-the-other-hand, achievement is very difficult, and though everyone thinks they can, most can't. Achievement is not primarily luck: there's a list of things to accomplish, and when you're done, you get the credit for achieving. Plus, no one can take your achievements from you; there's a plaque somewhere with your name on it. This means somebody else's achievement lowers your relative status, which does spike envy & resentment. Is it no wonder that wealth is admired while achievement rises suspicion.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-22_603_wealth_vs_achievement.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-22_603_wealth_vs_achievement.mp3 1:59 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash achievement, wealth, humor, politics no Sun, 02 Jun 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Most achievements don't mean much anymore: education, travel, entrepreneurship; all have lost their luster for a variety of reasons, mostly to do with the Internet. Intellectual achievements no longer offer cachet because anyone can know anything by asking their phone: the Internet is your doctor and your lawyer. As for travel; the Internet can show you anyplace and anytime in the world in full 3D surround-sound. Even athletic achievement has been minimized: thousands of people run marathons every weekend, play interactive videogames where they are the star, or participate in sports at levels exceeding what Olympians used to achieve. Combine these replacements with the change in social values that consider ambition as bad, and it leads to the devaluation of achievement, and more specifically, people that have actually accomplished something, created something, or traveled somewhere. There's an additional powerful contributor to the disenchantment with achievements: because many people are told from childhood that they are special & unique, combined with the handing out of advanced degrees for virtually any ridiculous subject, people think they could have achieved degrees/licenses/travel/creativity if they just had the inclination/time/money/luck, and when actual reality proves that not to be the case, the cognitive dissonance causes them to be fervently dismissive of anyone who has. Also, achievement is not like wealth; not anybody can do it, so by comparison, those that have achieved lower the perceived value of everyone around them; of course, hostility is the reaction.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-20_602_achievement.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-20_602_achievement.mp3 2:36 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash achievement, humor, politics no Fri, 31 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy What do most people want before all else: money; at least what money will bring, which is everything. Some pseudo-intellectuals say money doesn't buy happiness, but it does, and it also provides a sense of superiority, especially for males who equate money with better sex. Money is also status: the things, the clubs, the awards; and other people are intimidated by money; they assume rich folks are better than them: smarter, better looking, more suave. However, if someone does get rich, they expect all those things to happen to them too; money is the ultimate equalizer. It's odd that it doesn't make much difference how someone gets their money: hard work, luck, crime, inheritance; it still inspires admiration, probably because individuals believe that it could happen to them: win the lottery, gold coins buried in the backyard, Uncle Eric dies and leaves you the estate. Las Vegas exists because of this belief: the naive optimism, the burning desire, the hope which even overcomes the envy that shadows all other kinds of achievement and success. With all this going for it, no wonder it's so hard to tell the difference between money and god.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-29_601_people_admire_money.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2019-05-29_601_people_admire_money.mp3 2:21 martin@hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash money, admire, politics, humor no Wed, 29 May 2019 07:19:05 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review why nothing is more important to society than family: Your life doesn't start until marriage. Divorce should be recognized for its positive aspects over the negative ones. Children are society's primary goal. Child care is not something only professionals can do. How did Single Moms become celebrated? Children should be raised in a community, not as Welfare supplicants. Undisciplined children can blame their parents when they fail as adults. Families are the fundamental building block of society, however they're composed. A Marriage Penalty of federal income taxes is inexcusable. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-06_600_family_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-06_600_family_concepts.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash family, humor, politics no Mon, 27 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy “Marriage penalty” is the colloquial term given to the addition in taxes that married people have to pay compared to if they had stayed single. Over the decades, the marriage penalty has come and gone depending on which voting block was most powerful; single people or married people. Though the Trump tax changes have reduced it, there is still a marriage penalty on Federal Income taxes for low income earning couples. The most ironic part of the marriage penalty is that it becomes a bonus when there is only one high-earner; it's only a penalty when both parents work, as much as 12% of their income. It's even worse for low-earners who may lose their Earned Income Tax Credit when they get married and their spouse's additional low income pushes them out of eligibility. Taxes confuse most people, especially the difference between State and Federal taxes. Because some States, such as Washington, don't have Income taxes, and some states, like Oregon, make sure there is no marriage penalty, many people mistakenly believe there isn't one, but for federal taxes, the marriage penalty is real indeed. The excuse for the marriage penalty is inexcusable: “because it would take a significant change to the U.S. Tax code;” as if it's never happened before, or that all the other big changes to save The Rich money aren't significant enough? There is also the bizarre filing option of “Married Filing Separately” where married couples are penalized even more. What? They can make the penalty worse but they can't make it better? It should be indisputable that married people should only receive benefits from their commitment to one another, never a penalty. How do the ultra-rich get special Capital Gains tax rates but poor working couples get shafted?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-06_599_marriage_penalty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-06_599_marriage_penalty.mp3 2:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash marriage penalty, humor, politics no Sat, 25 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Families are the fundamental building blocks of society. Single Millennials may think they're the center-of-the-universe but without kids, single people, even childless couples, are little more than drones, ignored in their old age, and completely invisible to history. That's a hard fact for narcissists to hear, but the ultimate goal of everyone should be to be part of a family. Fortunately, the definition of a “family" now transcends legal and traditional boundaries. It makes no difference who raises a well-balanced child; many same-sex families raise children. Any committed relationship that propels society forward should be condoned and applauded. In that respect, there's no problem with polygamy either; in fact, I'm descended from a polygamous family. Unfortunately, family disintegration is a problem in the U.S., and the birth rate too. As a society we must figure out how to make having children more convenient and less expensive, but bigger than that, we must push back against the treats to The Patriarchy currently emanating from The Left. An anti-family narrative has somehow escaped the ivory towers of academia, and infiltrated the boardrooms, school rooms, and school boards of America. Masculinity is denigrated; femininity is despised; religion, the bulwark of families, is under attack. How this happened, how having children became anathema, how single-motherhood became applauded, is a lesson in how to boil a frog... And destroy a society... Which is the stated goal, even though it was kept under wraps by the complicit media for decades... But now we know, so what are you going to do about it?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-06_598_family.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-06_598_family.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash family, humor, politics no Thu, 23 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Discipline is one of a parent's primary responsibilities, yet many parents have neither the aptitude, knowledge, experience, nor inclination to complete this role. Discipline curtails future behavioral problems. Many parents have become so lenient and narcissistic that unruly children are enabled; that can't possibly end well; in fact, an undisciplined child is forgiven blaming their parents when their adult lives fail to launch due to a lack of maturity, direction and impulse control. It's no longer socially acceptable to physically discipline your child, at least not in public, but a child's cognitive skills are little better than the family dog, who isn't going to stop eating from the counter by getting a Time-Out. However, it's the surprise and dominance that serve the purpose of curtailing bad actions rather than pain; simple, immediate, obvious cause-and-responses legitimately modify a child's behavior. The prohibition against corporal punishment stems back to the 17th Century in the writings of John Locke, the father of Liberalism, who said, “parents could reward good behavior with their esteem and punish bad behavior with disgrace as opposed to beatings.” That's some sage advice but a quick swat when your 2-year old's about to touch the stove is still the best deterrent.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-06_597_disciplining_children.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-06_597_disciplining_children.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash discipline, children, disciplining, humor, politics no Tue, 21 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Children are resilient: it makes little or no difference to a child how it comes into the world, in/out of wedlock, wanted/unwanted, poor/rich; children don't know and don't care; luckily for the human race which has spent the vast majority of its history raising children mostly in those conditions. The one statistic that is worrisome, however, is that children raised on Welfare, tend to never break out of the cycle of dependency. There is apparently a connection between The State being responsible for a child's upbringing versus a family or community. It might even come down to something as ephemeral as respect and love; not something a bureaucracy can ever provide, but a parent or community can. It's not like social scientists don't know this but they sit on their hands, probably because anytime somebody tries to do anything they run into politics. However, the solution is obvious: there's lots of informal babysitting, formalize it; there's lots of home-schooling, mostly informal, formalize it; there are lots of informal car pools to get kids to school and activities, and informal study halls, and informal sports, formalize them all. Use Apps, give the parents and kids smartphones. Also, recognize that among all the incompetent people that have children, some are competent, so dole most of the work out to them in return for their Welfare. The idiot parents can go take drugs, hook, hang around the park, whatever they do; when they finally get home, they can hug their kids, say they love them, take 2 minutes out of their sorry lives to make the kids feel wanted, then go away, leaving the true informal support network to pick up the slack.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-05_596_raising_welfare_children.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-05_596_raising_welfare_children.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash children, welfare, politics, humor no Sun, 19 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The stereotypical Single Mom has a child out of wedlock then is supported by the State; or the divorced mother of 3 clinging to alimony and child support from a begrudging Ex. Then there are moms who want the kid but don't want the partner, instead using a sperm-donor, who parade around like they're something special, and need elite treatment, proud that they are manipulating the future of society. The fact is, most moms are single even when they're married because the other parent is so wrapped up in themselves and their careers that mom is left alone to take care of their kids by herself. They're lives are no easier than celebrated Single Moms but not as fashionable. It's time to stop thinking about Single Moms and start focusing on the children; there is ample evidence that a two-parent home with a dominate male role model is the most beneficial to them. In the old days the two partner's would stay together for the sake of the kids, but that has been sacrificed to narcissism and selfishness. Single Mom kids are often budding socialists, thinking society owes them rather than visa versa. In fact, today's political divide could be described as the children of Single Moms versus the status quo, and that's not going to end any better than it started.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-05_595_single_moms.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-05_595_single_moms.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash single moms, humor, politics no Fri, 17 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Times have changed in the past century, people are mobile; new parents don't live close to extended family to help take care of children any longer. Worse, child care is victim to the weaknesses of Market solutions, and has become way too expensive for young families just starting out. Tax deductions for children don't make sense because most of the people who really need daycare don't pay much taxes; and there's already a Child Credit, but giving people money at the end of the year is too disconnected from their expenses today. There's got to be a way for working mothers to drop their kids off somewhere without it costing half their low wage salary; and if they choose to stay at home with their children, that should be a benefit to society. New ages require new ways to address problems; child care can take advantage of the "Sharing Economy," utilizing Smartphone Apps. Childcare is not a profession that needs formal training; there are many, many people who can help raise children, and have already proved it. We have grandparents and neighbors babysitting now, and there's lots more grandparents whose kids don't live close enough to babysit but would babysit someone else's grandkids in exchange for the same for theirs. Plus, there's those stay-at-home moms who could handle someone else's child occasionally. Where you live isn't called a "community" just because the houses are close together.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-04_594_child_care.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-04_594_child_care.mp3 2:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash children, child care, politics, humor no Wed, 15 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The #1 goal of any society is to perpetuate itself, and that means having children. That's why Reproductive Rights are strongly supported in U.S. jurisprudence: no forced contraception, no child-bearing licenses, parents decides for the child, and legal abortion. Unfortunately, there is a self-loathing component promoted by the Identity Politics Left that explicitly demands no more White babies, and there are many White Millennial woman who feel guilty because of this. There's also the negative pressure from Lefty Green politics, embodied in Environmentalism that creates a negative view of humanity; it's easy to feel sanctimonious about deer and salamanders, but White men, not so much. Having children has gone from being free throughout history to becoming incredibly expensive. It’s only been within the last couple centuries that kids were considered to be more than extra hands to work the farm. They paid for themselves by remaining ignorant and working 12 hour days from the age of 8. That’s no longer an acceptable solution to insuring reproduction, and religion's positive childbearing influence is waning, giving way to societal indoctrination in public schools that actually discourage children in a secondhand way with their emphasis in preventing teen-pregnancy, but no counteracting message that children are positive and beneficial, and having them in your twenties is a good thing.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-04_593_children.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-04_593_children.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash children, politics, humor no Mon, 13 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There's a 70% chance that marriages can stay together for a decade before they divorce, and an even chance that they can stay together for 20 years. Those would be pretty good odds in Vegas but somehow expectations, probably religious indoctrination, there's the idea that people would stay married for their whole lives. That's unrealistic. People change, and multiple decades is a lot of change. Divorce should be considered a normal practice so easy divorce is good; spouses shouldn't feel locked in forever. Quickie divorces between equal partners without children, no attorneys involved, are popular. Unfortunately, the specter of divorce hangs over men. The Cultural Marxist tactic of dividing people has clearly redefined marriage as men are Oppressors and women are Oppressed; historically, and forever more. Add in children, and a new class of indentured servitude has emerged; divorced men. The stereotype is that men lose their autonomy to venal, grasping women “taking everything,” but this is not born out in reality; many couples are young, buying things mostly on credit, and since money is a leading cause for divorce, when what little assets are split between spouses, there is not enough equity to carry so much debt, and all the things bought on credit get repossessed. Frankly, everyone wants to play victim, divorced men too.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-03_592_divorce.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-03_592_divorce.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash divorce, humor, politics no Sat, 11 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Marriage is like a starting gun; until people get married, their lives are on hold. Marriage is where maturity comes from because it's when everything stops being only about you. Even bad marriages are better than never, and even divorce is better than never growing up. Marriage means making a commitment: marriage is buying a house, marriage is changing your friends, marriage is having a person you trust to make the DNR. Many people think marriage is archaic, that anything you can do with a marriage, you could do with a contract, but that's just as much marriage as standing in front of a priest. Many singles use the excuses that they can't afford marriage, or they don't want to be tied down, or they just haven't found the right person, but basically anybody can be married to anybody. Couples throughout history have done fine in arranged marriages, they still do, and most people marry the equivalent of the neighbor-girl, convenience and chance. Life is a series of lucky events: you're lucky when you find a partner to get married; maybe that one will work out, which would be fairytale-like, or maybe you have to try to get lucky again. Even if you lose everything in a divorce: next... And if you get children out of a marriage, that's worth the whole lot; both to you and to society. Tick, tick, tick; get married soon, you can't stay a kid forever.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-03_591_marriage.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-03_591_marriage.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash marriage, politics, humor no Thu, 09 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy "Free" Trade is the darling of Collectivists and multinational corporations everywhere. A Trade Deficit leaks sovereignty away from America half a trillion dollars at a time. The Balance of Payments includes all the ways America is prostituting its economy to the world. “Free” Trade transfers wealth from everyone to The Rich. America is selling itself to other nations for trinkets. The Washington Consensus was the economic cover used to impose Globalist ideals on developing nations. Globalism is Collectivism, and Nationalism is liberty. The TPP is a Globalist plot to make all nations subject to the New World Order. Isolationism, in the form of nationalism, is a good thing. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.  ]]> Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-02_590_trade_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-02_590_trade_concepts.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash trade, free trade, balance of payments, isolationism, humor, politics no Tue, 07 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy When trade increases productivity, it's a good thing, but when trade is used to bypass U.S. regulations, or undercut American workers, it's a bad thing. That's where the term “Fair trade” came from, as a means to discourage exploitation. Unfortunately, in the public's mind, trade is trade is trade, and trying to promote only Fair Trade or Balanced Trade, is ignored. The unfortunate fact is, exploitative trade is worse than no trade at all; America could provide everything its citizens need from within our borders, no need to enrich The 1% at everyone else's expense; no need to sell America to rich foreigners; no need to sacrifice the average American's liberty so that the Nouveau Aristocracy can get wealthier. “America First” is kind of an isolation; not just trade but abdicating our role as the world's policemen. In that regard, China is isolationist, Russia is isolationist, as are most other nations, at least with their nationalistic tendencies. In fact, the world is finding its nationalism again; regular people don't want to be part of a New World Order; they don't want to lose their sense of identity, nor be subject to the whims of Collectivists. America has been successfully isolationist before and is moving in that direction again, with the biggest beneficiary being liberty.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-02_589_isolationism_again.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-02_589_isolationism_again.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash isolationism, isolationist, trade, politics, humor no Sun, 05 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The TransPacific Partnership (TPP) was put on hiatus by the election of Donald Trump, but it still has relevance because the next president may be a Globalist rather than a Nationalist. The most noteworthy part of TPP was that it was a secret agreement. As odd as that sounds, its proponents seem to find no problem with America signing something that only a couple dozen business executives and Globalists knew what they were agreeing to. We have country-to-country trade now; which for a nationalist, is a lot better than an overarching worldwide business-to-business agreement, without input or control from its citizenry. The most heinous part of TPP was its enforcement mechanism. If your sovereign nation used democracy to create a regulation that would be detrimental to an international corporation's profits, such as an anti-smoking message on cigarette packaging, TPP provides a lackey-court to determine whether your nation owes the international corporation the profits it might have made without the regulation; then all the other nations in the TPP must stop trading with your nation until it pays up. The multinational banks simply won't process transactions of the violating nation, essentially excluding them from any world trade at all. If trade makes a nation, and business controls the trade, then TPP lets business control all nations. Consider how close the U.S. got to the brink...   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-02_588_tpp.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-02_588_tpp.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash transpacific partnership, TPP, humor, politics no Fri, 03 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Globalists want a One World Government and Open Borders, Collectivism on a grand scale. They use as justification their claim of less violence and longer lifespans that comes from doing what is best for everybody. The obvious problem with Globalization is that everyone has to have the same goals – worldwide. The opposite of Globalism is Nationalism, the attempt by a country to retain its own unique religions, customs, and traditions; to maintain national borders, and to encourage the goals and ideals of their own country on the international stage. The first loss to Globalism will be liberty; Globalism focuses on equality, usually in the arena of post-modernism; the claim that women and minorities have been continuously oppressed by Western culture, namely The Patriarchy, and that a New World Order would require the oppressors to stand down until everyone is on equal footing. Globalism also finds support among the international business community that would benefit from universal trade without national barriers, such as tariffs or local purchasing preferences. Among the more prosaic Globalist goals is to prevent robots, genetic engineering, and Climate Change. In my particular case, age and conflict aren't even in my Top 10 desires; I want anticipation, achievement, and adventure; I can't wait for the robots and genetically modified humans. I guess that makes me a Nationalist?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-01_587_globalists_vs_nationalists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-01_587_globalists_vs_nationalists.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash globalism, nationalism, humor, politics no Wed, 01 May 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The concept of “Free” Trade was formalized in the 1990s by economist John Williamson; the neoliberal policies of "stabilize, privatize, and liberalize trade." It was adopted by Washington, D.C.-based institutions; the IMF, World Bank, and U.S. Treasury, so it became known as the “Washington Consensus,” and was immediately contentious. For example, the policy's emphasis on penetrating developing countries by global markets before those countries had established economic equilibrium of their own. There was also the concern that Markets would eclipse State functions. It was during this period that Globalist power was at its peak, with international conglomerates overwhelming small countries in court, crushing all their nationalistic aims. Essentially, the Washington Consensus exploits the fact that immigration controls are the equivalent of tariffs on labor, with the difference in pay profiting international corporations. Developing countries were encouraged to implement the policies of the Washington Consensus as a condition for receiving loans from the IMF and World Bank; emphasizing Free Markets by reducing State regulation, and impinging on national sovereignty. Often, the reforms led to destabilization, especially in Latin America; the same kind of problems that have caused the increasing income inequality in the United States. The Washington Consensus is generally considered to be a failed concept; it's now accepted that economic strategies work best if they are specifically designed for individual countries, but the chaos it wrought still lingers, and Globalists have not gone away quietly.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-01_586_washington_consensus.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-10-01_586_washington_consensus.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash washington consensus, free trade, politics, humor no Mon, 29 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Another nation cannot exchange their currency for U.S. Treasuries, otherwise they would simply print their way into having America's taxpayers be their slaves. No, they've got to use U.S. dollars, and they've got to get those dollars from someplace. Congo and Kyrgyzstan don't have a lot of U.S. Treasuries but China does: why is that? When Apple builds a factory in China, it has to convert U.S. dollars, and the Chinese use those dollars to buy American assets: stocks and property. Apple essentially sold a piece of America to a foreign power so that they could get richer. The euphemism is that Apple is “investing” in China, and China is “investing” in the U.S., but do we really want major property and business ownership to be in the hands of foreigners whose national interest is not our own? Do we want them buying Real Estate, creating bubbles that deny home ownership to average Americans? It's actually worse than that: compare if Apple spends $100 million in the U.S. employing American workers who pay taxes and buy things from people who pay taxes and buy things, and so forth; but if Apple spends the same money in China, Chinese workers get the money, the U.S. receives no taxes. Also, Chinese workers buy things from Chinese people who pay no taxes to the U.S., and so forth. Who really benefits from Globalism?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-30_585_selling_america.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-30_585_selling_america.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash foreign investment, humor, politics no Sat, 27 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy When the word “progressive” is used in economic terms, it means the transfer of wealth downward, rich to poor. Conversely, “regressive” means the opposite, wealth goes upward; poor to rich. Free trade is regressive because it transfers wealth from the 99% to The 1%. How it does that has been obscured by the proselytizing that free trade provides cheaper goods for everyone, and that “a rising tide lifts all boats,” which seems true on the surface, except for a little publicized counter-example: The U.S. has enormous trade deficits, meaning foreign countries are awash in U.S. money; and what do they do with those dollars? They buy U.S. Treasuries, and who ultimately pays off Treasuries? U.S. taxpayers. Free trade is subsidized by taxpayers, therefore the real price of free trade goods must include those costs, so the ultimate price of a free trade good is closer to the price if the product was made domestically. In the final analysis, average taxpayers are paying about the same overall with The 1% getting money equal to the Trade Deficit. A similar thing happens when a company builds a $100 million factory in China. The $100 million comes back in the form of China buying U.S. Treasuries, so the U.S. taxpayers are on the hook for the $100 million, so the only people that benefit from “free” trade are China and the company's shareholders.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-30_584_free_trade_is_regressive.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-30_584_free_trade_is_regressive.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash free trade, trade deficit, politics, humor no Thu, 25 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Though the media tends to focus on the Trade Deficit, there are many other ways that foreign nations can receive U.S. dollars that they then send back to the U.S., which finances our National Debt, and often causes bubbles. Balance of Payments is the economic term that encompasses everything; it includes Foreign Aid America makes to other countries, that's about $40 billion a year; immigrants transferring money back to their families, that's over $120 billion a year; counterfeiting, at a measly $200 million, is too small to notice, but illegal drug sales are about $100 billion a year, and another $100 billion a year from U.S. companies investing in China. With a Trade Deficit of $750 billion, plus all the other items, something over a $trillion needs corrected for. Foreign countries presumably do the same things back, so ideally, the deficit could be counterbalanced such that the total Balance of Payments is zero, and some figures indicate that it is. There were a couple decades, during the so-called “Washington Consensus,” when influential economists had convinced governments that the Balance of Payments did not matter, but the tide has changed; in fact, a zero balance of payments should be a nation's primary economic goal. This requires trade deals be renegotiated, unmatched investments in other countries to be discouraged, and financial transactions between countries scrutinized; all things the Trump administration is now pursuing.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-29_583_balance_of_payments.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-29_583_balance_of_payments.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash balance of payments, humor, politics no Tue, 23 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy For the past decade, the U.S. has been running a three-quarters of a $trillion Trade Deficit, the largest trade imbalance of any nation by far, over $10 trillion so far just this century, but “Free” Trade advocates insist this is not inherently a problem. They claim that in a fast-growing economy, trade provides the needed jump in productivity required to prevent inflation, and a rising tide lifts all boats. Unfortunately, the economy in the U.S. has fluctuated between robust and anemic during the same period without much of a change in the Trade Deficit. Also, they say high interest rates make our goods more expensive, inciting imports, but the U.S. has had low interest rates the entire 21st Century, so continued insistence that the mounting debt is harmless are not reassuring. It's not just imports; when American companies set up shop in China, Vietnam, Mexico, etc., they are using $. Add to that all the $ sent home by immigrants, legal and otherwise. The causes of a Trade Deficit include the strength of the currency, and since the dollar is the world's Reserve currency, it's the safe haven for countries looking for someplace to keep their money. Included in that is all their surplus trade dollars coming back, which creates financial and market bubbles as other countries look for things to invest in the U.S.: property, stocks, bonds, Treasuries, and derivatives; a form of financial colonization. This also raises the specter of other, possibly hostile, nations having the leverage to crash the U.S. economic system, unless of course, the U.S. government never intends to pay off its debt, in which case, Americans got all those foreign made products for free. If that happens, the Trade Deficit can actually be viewed as tribute from the World for the U.S. being so awesome.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-29_582_trade_deficit.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-29_582_trade_deficit.mp3 2:51 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash trade deficit, humor, politics no Sun, 21 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy “Free” Trade is essentially the exploitation of destitute labor in other countries, only to impoverish our own, for the benefit of a small Nouveau Aristocracy. Worse, it cedes our national sovereignty to international courts, trade tribunals, and military pacts, which is extremely anti-democratic and certainly not in the best interests of our nation's citizens, violating the very essence of liberty. While Trade in general leads to better lives for everyone, “Free” Trade concentrates the benefits to a few, most often not even citizens of the U.S. Trump's attack on “Free” Trade is not unprovoked. Lilliputians know how to defeat a giant; swarm over it while it's unaware and tie it down with ropes; that's what NAFTA, WTO, and the proposed TPP did. When those agreements were made, the U.S. invariably took a subservient position, and the supposedly unbiased special trade courts found against the U.S. over 90% of the time. Other presidents said they were going to do something about the exploitation of the U.S. but they never did anything. Why? Because the weapon is tariffs, and gall enough to take on the whole world. Until Trump, there wasn't a president willing to take the political hit, but Trump rightly believes that no trade is better than “Free” Trade.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-28_581_free_trade_again.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-28_581_free_trade_again.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash free trade, trade, humor, politics no Fri, 19 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The U.S. is a large enough nation that it could theoretically supply anything it needed from within its own borders, but in the essential economic equation: consumption = production, trade can play an important part by increasing productivity. There are Capitalism reasons for trade with other countries but the increase in productivity it provides is the most important; some countries have a production advantage on some products that the U.S. simply can't match. Trade is a win-win situation; however, it's fraught with exploitative opportunities, both to and from. Some kinds of trade are good: balanced trade is awesome; tit-for-tat, they buy as much from us as we sell to them. Fair trade, the concept that Workers in other countries must be paid similar, and have the same regulations, as in the U.S., is fraught with ambiguity but workable because it's constantly being scrutinized. "Free" Trade, however, is not so good. Yes, everyone benefits but The 1% benefit more, and there is no redistribution of wealth so it concentrates, which is a drag on liberty, the single most important ideal, more important than trade or productivity.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-28_580_trade.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-28_580_trade.mp3 2:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash trade, balanced trade, fair trade, free trade, politics, humor no Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The whole concept of a corporation is confused, let's review: Business has no ethics, which leads to unethical behavior. A Liberty society relies of contracts to exist. Conduct Agreements are antithetical to liberty. Regulatory Capture is the most exploitative example of government oversight. Corporate Raiders are much more bad than good. Corporation bashing sets the table for socialism. Systemic Risk is based on predicting the future. Productivity is the most basic requirement of economics. Consumers are both the boon and bust of society. Unethical business creates unethical consumers. The U.S. has become an oligopoly of the Deep State and business influence. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-27_579_corporate_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-27_579_corporate_concepts.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash corporations, consumers, politics, humor no Mon, 15 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy People don't use the word “oligopoly” much anymore, except to describe Russian billionaires; we now use the word “Elites” to describe power concentrated into a small inner-circle of Deep State and monied interests that control the country. Oligopolies inevitably develop over time, a side effect of democracy. Indications of oligopoly are elected leaders who are related to each other, like the Bushes or the Clinton family, and revolving door lobbyists, plus all the bureaucratic underlings who mutually benefit via power or money. Another sign is an elected president who must contend with behind-the-scenes resistance from the past administration's holdovers. Unfortunately, Capitalism is easy prey to oligopoly, so it seems certain to occur if there is no ethical indoctrination against it, or mechanism to prevent or dismantle it. America seemed resistant to oligopoly in the past but that may be an illusion of history; those old famous ultra-rich families are still ultra-rich, moreso even; how did they get and stay that way without extraordinary behind-the-stage influence. The monolithic alignment of media against Donald Trump is proof enough that the U.S. has slipped into an oligopoly, finally making The People aware of it, but it's difficult to tell right now if he is the cure or its victim.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-27_578_oligopoly.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-27_578_oligopoly.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash oligopoly, humor, politics no Sat, 13 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There's no ethics in business. In fact, business has no goal but to make a profit, and no rules but those established by government; why should it be any different for their customers? People have to voluntarily obey the law, and since in many cases regular people don't know what the law is, they follow the ethics ingrained in them by society. Often, the chance of being detected, let alone punished is so remote that only society's conditioning prevents wholesale abandonment of any ethics whatsoever. Overpaid? Keep it. Wrong product? Yours; pirate movies; skip having a ticket by going in the exit; there a thousand different ways to abuse the trust society depends on. When the relationship between business and consumers becomes adversarial enough; for example, the monopolistic cable provider inexorably raising prices, the resentment of its consumers will lead to pilfering any time the opportunity arises. It's gotten to the point where businesses must provide their own enforcement, private security officers in stores, now twice as many as there are police. When people have to be forced to be ethical by cameras and an army, how is that different than a Police State, and this disparity is only going to increase because unethical consumers are growing at a faster rate than honest ones.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-27_577_unethical_consumers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-27_577_unethical_consumers.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash unethical consumers, consumers, politics, humor no Thu, 11 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy After that first bit of necessary consumption: food, shelter, protection; being a consumer is actually empowering. Buying things puts control into the hands of the purchaser. For some people, this is a proactive way they can position themselves in the dominance hierarchy, which is why the thing they buy is not nearly as important as being the one making decisions and ordering around the staff. For example, shoes are very personal, almost unique to the individual, have lots and lots of varieties, are relatively cheap, require an attendant, and makes the consumer happy, which makes purchasing shoes the ideal example of consumerism, but how many pairs of shoes does one person need? Consumers also find cohesiveness in the things they buy since the places they shop at, limit what they can purchase to what the majority of people want. This is a very subtle but powerful way to create a cultural cohesion because a nation is what it consumes, which makes the backlash against consumerism very concerning; yes, people can live in the forest, wearing only a loincloth and eating twigs & leafs, but that's on the wrong end of the spectrum of the goal of only working 3-hours a week. Tarzan's opportunities for self-improvement are severely limited compared to George Jetson's.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-27_576_consumers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-27_576_consumers.mp3 2:10 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash consumers, politics, humor no Tue, 09 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Isn't the goal for everybody to live like the Jetsons, working 3 hours per week, and spending the rest of the time pursuing your own muse. There's only one way to get there and that's through an economic system that increases productivity, specifically a Market-based system that relies on greed for motivation. No one makes a new machine that replaces hundreds of jobs out of altruism; they do it so that they can increase their own little nest-egg. If greed is made unpalatable by the politics of envy, increases in productivity stop; in fact, productivity decreases. Almost all increases in productivity come from progress; scientific, technical, information, managerial; but no one can ever forget that somewhere someone is pushing the button or the broom. No matter how fancy the machinery gets, people still have to work, at least enough so that production equals consumption. Producing implies consuming so the connection between work ethic and buying a new 4-wheeler or iPhone must be clear, and it needs to be on a personal level; your productivity equals your consumption. Work ethic is so important to society that it must be instilled at youth, as it used to be; clean your room, do your homework, go to practice. A society that does not ingrain in its citizens the relationship between consuming and producing is doomed.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-26_575_productivity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-26_575_productivity.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash productivity, consumption, work ethic, humor, politics no Sun, 07 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Reminding people that no one can predict the future is a Fool's Errand; getting a glimpse into what will happen next is one of life's biggest entertainments. That's why soothsayers, such as “public intellectual” Nicholas Taleb, gets away with his ridiculous “systemic risk” argument. That hogwash reasoning is often central to the "we must do something about Climate Change” refrain, and goes like this: Climate Change is so big, and so horrific, that no matter how small the chance that it might happen, we must assume it will happen, and do whatever we have to. It's not just the fortune telling that undermines such dishonest reasoning, it's the applicability to almost anything. How about the chance of the volcanic basin in Yellowstone National Park erupting, or the great California earthquake, or a meteorite strike? Applying this same logic to Muslims: if there's even a tiny chance that 1.6 billion Muslims plan to take over the world, form a theocracy and subjugate women then we must assume it will happen, and act accordingly. Systemic Risk arguments sound plausible to the illogical, but it's an easy step to preparing for space aliens attacking Earth.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-26_574_systemic_risk.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-26_574_systemic_risk.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash systemic risk, politics, humor no Fri, 05 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The animosity directed towards corporations has been increasing for the past couple of decades, starting about the time of the fall of the Soviet Union. That's not a coincidence; the rise in support for socialism in America requires the demonization of Capitalism, most exemplified in bashing corporations, but leading directly to disdain of business in general. From there, scorn and ridicule gets heaped on the person who operates a service station or sandwich shop. Meritocracy itself, denigrated as part of “The Patriarchy,” is under fire. People are always looking for a bogeyman that is causing their problems, but when the scapegoat is foundational to our society, and the hate and venom is deflecting onto the people who are its backbone, pitting neighbor against neighbor, this will lead to non-cooperation and diminishes all our lives. It's happening now, and its cause is clear: when socialism again became acceptable, so did the inevitable collapse of The American Dream. The solution isn't to reign-in corporations, the solution is to delegitimize socialism, but who's going to do that? Corporations? Government? Religion? Where does a resuscitation of Capitalism's image begin?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-25_573_corporation_bashing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-25_573_corporation_bashing.mp3 2:04 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash corporations, corporation bashing, politics, humor no Wed, 03 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Capitalism's biggest exploit is to legally steal the savings of everyday people. Corporate raiders leverage the weaknesses of corporate governance to fleece the companies they infect. Their intention is to take out massive loans, draining a floundering company of all equity, then eventually bankrupting, leaving bond-holders and stockholders in the lurch. It's only possible because there are multiple opaque layers and not enough caution because all the intermediaries make money no matter what. The people hurt are the clueless investors who financed the junk bond loans through their funds, and the company's minority shareholders whose stocks become valueless. Corporate Raiders have absolutely no value; they do not thin the herds of the weak as their supporters so often declare, but instead siphon off the remaining value of a failing business, that could instead be used to replenish underfunded worker's pensions, and if the company went broke naturally, the stockholders and bond holders would have at least got something back on their investment. The fact that corporate raiders can operate with impunity is indication that they spread their ill-gotten gains around to the people who should otherwise be prosecuting them. Consider that one of their ilk, Mitt Romney, of Bain Capital infamy, was governor of Massachusetts, ran for president, and is now a senator from Utah; a modern-day pirate supported by his Mormon voting block, suffering no consequences for his actions. No wonder Capitalism has a bad name.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-25_572_corporate_raiders.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-25_572_corporate_raiders.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash corporate raiders, politics, humor no Mon, 01 Apr 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Economist Bruce Yandle identified the Baptist & Bootleggers theory of government regulations; it's the combination of self-righteous, highly motivated sanctimonious do-gooders who want control over everyone else's lives, in a blind partnership with the smugglers and underworld interests that benefit by violating new restrictions. There's also the shadowy for-profit interests hiding behind public-interest groups to fund deceptive legislation intended to reduce competition, then charge higher prices than it costs them to comply. Unfortunately, many regulations are the demon spawn of just such alliances; everyday examples include the Clean Air Act, Pure Food and Drug Act, NAFTA, and the tobacco settlement, among many others over the past three decades. How do we stop this nefarious practice? First, business should not be able to contribute to campaigns. This seems like a no-brainer but somehow has been compromised at the Supreme Court level. Second, forbid lobbyists of any kind; how can a normal human being just trying to do their job be expected to remain objective under a barrage of temptation, bullying, and expert cajoling. Third and most important, retired regulators should be barred from benefiting from the industry they were regulating. These three suggestions won't stop Bootleggers from cynically supporting the Baptists but it will show that we know they're doing it.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-24_571_regulatory_capture.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-24_571_regulatory_capture.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash regulations, regulatory capture, bootleggers and baptists, humor, politics no Sat, 30 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It's unconscionable for you to sign yourself into slavery or indentured servitude so no court will enforce such a contract, but a Conduct Agreement, which is almost the same thing, is not the same because it isn't about forcing you to remain under contract but instead to dismiss you from one; you don't act like someone tells you to act, you're fired. This makes a Conduct Agreement very ethically challenging; you are being held to the subjective moral tenets of someone else, even in your private life. As problematic as this concept sounds, there are some professions, being a product spokesman for example, where a very narrow Conduct Agreement is appropriate; however, that gray line can easily turn into something more sinister. For example, when an employee's conduct has little to do with a company's reputation yet they have to maintain some personal code, possibly religious; perhaps your company may want you to pray, or say the Pledge of Allegiance. If so, is it okay for them to scrutinize your personal sexual habits? Considering the ramifications, a Conduct Agreement is actually compelled conduct, including Speech, which seems unacceptable from a liberty perspective. No realm; not business, not education, not politics, should be able to compel conduct in anyone's private life, not just the Constitutional ramifications, but because it exposes people's reputations and livelihoods to the banal, subjective, selfish interests of others who would benefit from turning you in. It becomes a society of watching over your shoulder, and suspecting your neighbor. Your private conduct is not up for anyone else to agree with.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-24_570_conduct_agreements.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-24_570_conduct_agreements.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash conduct agreement, humor, politics no Thu, 28 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Boiled down to its essence, “Rule of Law” means contract enforcement; when someone violates the terms of agreement of a contract, State Violence is there to crush the shirker, and both parties must be held accountable for their parts, with penalties attached for non-performance. In fact, all contracts are really about adjudicating force, so there must be clearly identified goals with measurable results that a jury can understand and judge. There is also the special case where one of the parties to the agreement has an overwhelming advantage, more than a jury would be willing to support; those contracts are void because they are unenforceable. Besides contracts that you have to explicitly sign, there are more ephemeral implicit contracts; the so-called “social” contract being a prime example that has a huge impact on our lives. Unfortunately, without exactly spelled out expectations and duties of all parties, implicit contracts generate conflict due of their subjectivity; people interpret the actions of others based on their own ideology, and there is no court of law to adjudicate. For example, the liberty interpretation of the social contract considers people being responsible for themselves, but the Collectivist view is that good-fortune should be shared with everybody; clearly the antithesis of each other, but the world couldn't run without implicit contracts. For both types of contracts; explicit and implicit, people have to want to honor them for them to work.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-23_569_contracts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-23_569_contracts.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash contracts, politics, humor no Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy A business is not a person, it is a machine, so can have no morals. In fact, a business should be amoral because morals are subjective, not legally objective, so they cannot be applied nor enforced; it's ridiculous to even try. Ethics are similarly artificial, and have the same fundamental problem of: why should everyone be under the yoke of the ethics of the few? A clear line between people and business needs to be drawn; one that separates the moral, ethical, and social obligations of people from business. For a business, the only rule more important than generating profits is to stay within the confines of the law. This is a pretty wide interpretation because it means anything not specifically restricted is open to business, which leads to exploitation unless there are regulations stopping it, which works, as long as the process of regulation is formalized, and not subject to morals or ethics. It's never business that's the problem, it's the the people who run business that are flawed; people who forget that business serves society, not the other way around. This same situation applies to government.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-23_568_business_ethics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-23_568_business_ethics.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash business ethics, ethics, business, politics, humor no Sun, 24 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Today's politics swirls around immigration, making the concepts timely: Government shirks its duty by making employers responsible for enforcing immigration policy. Adverse possession is the legal concept that people who live here, legally or not, become partial owners. Immigrants imply productivity but refugees imply consumption. Anchor Babies combined with Chain Migration take most of the selectivity out of our immigration policy. You don't have to look too far to see that having more people does not automatically mean more prosperity. The Globalist concept of Open Borders makes everyone citizens of the world, not of nations. Immigrant societies that don't integrate are destined to split apart. Illegal Immigrants already vote on local issues in some cities, and there's a history of non-citizens voting in the U.S. How has illegal immigration reached the point that troops are required at the Border? A national census that doesn't ask citizenship status wastes time & money. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-22_567_immigration_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-22_567_immigration_concepts.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash immigration, anchor babies, chain migration, illegal immigration, citizenship, humor politics no Fri, 22 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The U.S. Census is commanded in the U.S. Constitution to be made every 10 years. Besides the actuarial interest it generates, it also has political ramifications because it determines how the 435 U.S. House representatives are allocated among the States, and what Identity Groups receive government money, so it has become a lightening rod of controversy. For example, the next Census is during Trump's administration and he'd like to include a question about citizenship. This has inflamed the non-citizens and anti-border advocates, who don't want those numbers accurately known. Of course, cries of “racism” were immediately raised, though the irony is that the Census is already patently racist; until 1970, Hispanics/Spanish/Latino were grouped in with “White,” and still are when ethnicity of our prison population is counted. Eventually Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, and Other Spanish got their own categories, though people from India are still counted as White. Why race is even a question on a census is debatable, but whether people here are citizens or not seems very important since it impacts Voter's Rights. A citizenship question used to be on all census forms in 1950, and on the Long Form from 1970 until 2000. There was a change in 2010 to make the census easier to fill out in an attempt to get greater participation, so the citizenship question was dropped, but in this age of ulterior political motives, where immigrants are more revered than existing citizens, and the idea of borders is under attack, the argument is that everyone is a citizen of the world, and everyone in the world is a rightful citizen of the U.S., the census has become a symbol of Nationalism.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-22_566_census_citizenship.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-22_566_census_citizenship.mp3 2:51 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash census, citizenship, politics, humor no Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy A couple of times in the past decades, presidents Bush and Obama made the symbolic gesture of sending National Guard troops to the Mexican border to help prevent illegal immigration because the numbers are staggering, over 35,000 arrests a month. Trump did it too when news of an “Immigrant Caravan” started hitting the news. He sent 6,000 troops, but it's kind of a voluntary thing on State governor's part; 6 States decided not to send any troops, and 3 States brought their troops home after a few months. It's not like the soldiers can do much to stop border crossings due Defense Department regulations, they won't even be carrying guns, however, they can probably watch screens and listen for alarms, and they could accompany real border guards as training exercises, then rush in to scare the bejesus out of desperate people who are already apprehensive of soldiers. Fear works. Guys in military garb, wearing sun-glasses and holding machine guns is great theatrics, lots of noise, bad smells, scary closeness; make the women and children cry and the men cower. Described like that, it seems unlikely having troops at the border has any real positive effect, but they do reassure people who want a wall.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-22_565_troops_at_the_border.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-22_565_troops_at_the_border.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash troops at the borders, illegal immigrants, immigrants, politics, humor no Mon, 18 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Americans have been limiting immigration since 1790, and started the immigration service in 1891 to really put the brakes on who was getting into the U.S. They wanted God-fearing Europeans for the most part, and certainly none of those Chinese or more Blacks. However, citizenship still had to be acquired before an immigrant became a full member of society, including voter's rights, but many immigrants, even though they were here legally, never became citizens. The U.S. Constitution leaves voting requirements up to the States, and nothing in the Constitution limits voting to citizens, though citizens can't be prevented from voting while non-citizens can be. Up until 1875, 22 States allowed non-citizens to vote nationally, but by 1926, all States had excluded them. In 1996, a federal law was passed limiting voting only to citizens in federal elections, however, the Supreme Court disallowed citizenship checks before voting so it becomes a post hoc enforcement issue with few actual examples of penalties. For local elections, States have their own rules, and even cities can enfranchise whoever they want. In recent years, the argument has not been about whether only citizens should be allowed to vote, but about Illegal Immigrants, who are obviously not citizens, so the citizenship canard is used against them. Cities like San Francisco, Chicago, and small cities around America already allow Illegal Immigrants to vote, though no States do, and some Western nations, Denmark and New Zealand for example, allow non-citizens to vote. It makes sense that the people who live together vote together, regardless of citizenship or residency status, but there is the fear that unfettered Illegal Immigration that reorganizes whole communities through voting will lead to a culture clash so severe that it becomes divisive, degrading society cohesiveness rather than improving it, the opposite of what voting is intended to do.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-21_564_illegal_immigrants_voting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-21_564_illegal_immigrants_voting.mp3 3:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash illegals, illegal immigrants, voting, politics, humor no Sat, 16 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy An immigrant society isn't just a nation with lots of immigrants; without integration, that could easily end up as balkanization, where the society tears itself apart physically. The U.S., the leading nation recently built of immigrants, but also Australia and New Zealand, have all integrated just about anybody who shows up on their shores because a successful immigrant society homogenizes all of its peoples and cultures; what used to be called in America, “the Melting Pot.” Unfortunately, current Leftist dogma is trying to make this concept unfashionable. Instead, they intend immigrants to wield separate but unified power for themselves, exploiting democracy to benefit their specific race and culture, rather than integrate into the mainstream and vote on issues as a like-minded nation. The peril of this attitude is the division it causes. Resentment among those who consider themselves special due to their lineage is common in any tribal situation. Globalism attempts to circumvent that natural, evolutionary resistance, but the backlash may be substantial, as it is now worldwide, with a resurgence of national identity over individual identity. Politically, nationalism is considered the purview of The Right, and there are many heinous examples of nations experiencing extreme prejudice towards what they consider immigrants: Hutus versus Tutsis in Rwanda; Serbs versus Muslims in Croatia; Germans versus Jews during the Nazi era, and more recent examples all over the globe; but those occur because there was no integration. Society requires its diversified immigrant members to become one, not a number of diverse immigrant societies.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-21_563_immigrant_societies.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-21_563_immigrant_societies.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash immigrants, society, humor, politics no Thu, 14 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Open-Borders advocates have lots of reasons why immigration is good, and they will intentionally conflate illegal immigrants with legal ones, grouping them all together as if the same considerations apply. The Democratic Party seems to have taken this position, and most of the mainstream news media. In fact, Democratic candidates and members of congress are already calling for an end of ICE, the agency tasked with border enforcement. The existing immigrant communities, of which there are many, also support this for the obvious reason that more of their own people can come in. The Democratic Party finds the concept strategic because the vast majority of new immigrants will vote Democratic for the free stuff, an ever-increasing cycle. The Open Borders argument is basically: if people want to come to the U.S., they should be able to. But this gives all the power to the immigrant, and none to the citizens already living here. It's not up to the immigrants on whether they get to enter the U.S., it's up to us. Most immigrants simply want a better life, but even if they're poor, hungry, or will die otherwise, there's still a process, so they can be screened, and possibly denied. The whole issue is a referendum on Globalism; the idea that all human beings are one, that there are no national boundaries, and that there should be an enforced culture of secular humanism throughout the world. The cabal promoting this Globalism concept are governmental elites, international businesses, and Marxists. In their eyes, citizenship is a thing of the past; you belong to the world.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-20_562_open_borders.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-20_562_open_borders.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash open borders, immigration, politics, humor no Tue, 12 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Some pro-immigrant arguments are of the-more-the-merrier variety; they cite studies that conclude that more & more immigrants of any kind make a country wealthier & wealthier. That claim seems easy enough to debunk because, if true, places where refugees go now should be showing signs of wealth & opulence; places like Pakistan, Uganda & Bangladesh. An obvious question would be; how come those migrants didn't the-more-the-merrier where they already were? Obviously they don't, so there must be other ingredients involved, not just random migrants show up and everything's better. The one ultimate truth of all economics is that production must be equal to consumption, so immigrants that produce more than they consume probably fit the-more-the-merrier archtype, but when you consider that in today's America, more than half the people are net consumers, and those are people who are already up-to-speed with how America works, what percentage of immigrants are going to be producers when they touch American soil? Certainly, they will experience some length of downtime, and that's where the balancing equation comes in: who can be nurtured and helped into helping America? More deadbeats sure aren't going to be making America any merrier.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-20_561_the_more_the_merrier.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-20_561_the_more_the_merrier.mp3 2:08 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash immigration, migrants, humor, politics no Sun, 10 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The word “refugee” conjures up preconceptions of starving, huddled masses, living in make-shift tents, and eating charity-supplied rice. There's absolutely nothing good about this image, automatically triggering people's innate sense of pity & altruism. Exploiting sympathy has become a staple of The Left as a way to open borders and eliminate national boundaries, which is why a nation should be wary of admitting refugees. We must not let emotion and sanctimony override our self-interest. Refugees are entirely different than immigrants. Immigrants, the legal kind, conjure images of ambitious, hard-working American Dreamers, while refugees are more fodder for the Welfare roles. Immigrants want their own responsibility, while refugees consider themselves victims and expect to be taken care of. Winners in America's pseudo-meritocracy welcome immigrants, while Capitalism's losers prefer refugees because at least there's someone below them on the success hierarchy. There is no good solution for refugees, a hand-out and hands-off approach seems safest, yet still helping those who qualify as potential productive citizens to become immigrants.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-19_560_refugees_vs_immigrants.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-19_560_refugees_vs_immigrants.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash refugees, immigrants, humor, politics no Fri, 08 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Immigration into the U.S. doesn't have to be legally sanctioned, and often isn't. Sneaking over the border in the desert at night, or overstaying a visa may be the most publicized methods, but loopholes in the immigration law also provide entry to sophisticated scofflaws, the most famous being the misunderstood idea that if you are born in the U.S., you are automatically a citizen. Citizenship by birth, called jus soli, which means “right of the soil,” or Birthright citizenship, is a product of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states, "All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States.” However, an 1898 Supreme Court decision added the requirement that the mother must have permanent domicile in the U.S. This residency requirement is not widely known, and seems to be ignored. There's also the related concept of “maternity tourism,” a phenomenon where wealthy Asian women come to the U.S. to give birth to a child so that it would automatically gain U.S. citizenship, eventually providing the child's family a way to get into the U.S. themselves through another loophole, the process of “chain migration,” where related family members can enter the U.S. sponsored by an already admitted family member. It's the most common form of immigration, used in over 60% of the cases, amounting to over three-quarters of a million immigrants a year. Without enforcement of the residency requirement for mothers, and restriction on chain migration; border enforcement, wall or no wall, is little more than showmanship.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-19_559_anchor_babies.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-19_559_anchor_babies.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash immigration, anchor babies, chain migration, illegal immigration, humor politics no Wed, 06 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Immigration, legal or not, is how populations act. You can accept it as fact and look for solutions or you can fight the inevitable with rancor and incivility towards newcomers. Persecution is an unsavory option. Conservatives point at the law as their justification for denial of citizenship, and they believe in punishment for breaking the law, but pragmatism suggests that democracy is for all, not just for the ones who got here first. Civil rights would never have happened without public disavowal of the law at that time, and now immigration needs other solutions than are available in the law. Unfortunately, Democrats are acting with self-serving cynicism on illegal immigration because it empowers their Party, whereas Conservatives are resentful of newcomers who receive the same benefits as them without recognizing their superior status. With unsavory motives like those, is another way to look at it? U.S. Property Law has always recognized Adverse Possession: you must forcibly remove people you think are on your land illegally or it becomes theirs. Support for that idea is fuzzy, encompassing the mystic of land for hard labor, and disrespect for absent landlords. It can be interpreted a number of ways but one thing is for certain; people who are on the same land are in the same tribe because the things that happen to that land happen to everyone on it, so they should have a say. Democracy doesn't get more fundamental then that. This concept underlies the idea that if we allow illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. indefinitely then they become owners too.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-18_558_illegals_possession.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-18_558_illegals_possession.mp3 2:41 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash immigration, illegals, illegal immigration, adverse possession, humor, politics no Mon, 04 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There's a reason poor people from other countries want to live in the United States but the citizenry of the United States has no obligation to them. We can offer charity or not, it's entirely up to us; there's no Pope nor other sanctimonious cretins who can override our will because they are holier-than-us, know-better-n-us, or more-powerful-than-us. If The People don't want to allow entry, that's it, choice made, but once Illegal Immigrants are in America, what do we do then? Anytime someone mentions illegal immigration and how to stop it, somebody always suggests penalizing the people who employ them. Not only does this make private citizens responsible for government's border control obligations but what kind of enforcement are they imagining against employers? Destroy their business? Put legal citizens in jail for hiring Illegals and not even deport the Illegals? Plus, half the population is going to be covering for the Illegals. A huge portion of California is Hispanic, millions of them illegal. Their communities will certainly go Underground Railroad; law enforcement can't penetrate that. A quarter of U.S. commerce is grey-market now, it will simply expand; just drive by a Home Depot in the morning and see the Illegals waiting in the parking lot for somebody who's willing to hire them. No, making employers responsible is not going to work, especially when any lawyer can set up an LLC that employs Illegals that nobody will ever be prosecuted for. Laws only works if people want to abide by them, and immigration is one of those things that can only be prevented, not penalized.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-18_557_employing_illegal_immigrants.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-18_557_employing_illegal_immigrants.mp3 2:48 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash illegals, illegal immigration, politics, humor no Sat, 02 Mar 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Money is always confusing, so let's review some concepts: There are other ways to pay for public services but only taxes can redistribute concentrated wealth. Taxes are a mixed bag of who pays and who benefits, often counterproductive. Really, only the Nouveau Aristocracy need to pay taxes. Taxes aren't necessary as long as production is high and the money printing presses are hot. States all tax differently because people are confused about what they are for. Small Business shouldn't be in the tax collection business for The State. Treasuries represent debt; no need to issue them, just print money. The Fed's primary power is the ability to print money. If gold were money, an aristocracy would own everything. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.     Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-18_556_monetary_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-18_556_monetary_concepts.mp3 2:13 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash money, monetarism, monetary, the fed, politics, humor no Thu, 28 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Basing dollars on gold to prevent the printing of money is called monetarism: the idea is that there is only so much gold in the world which represents all the wealth in the world: get all the gold, have all the wealth. This misguided and superficial concept of money is easily debunked; for example, every time a bank makes a loan, money was essentially “printed,” no gold involved. Still, uncomprehending people often think a gold standard is a good idea because they don't know or don't care that monetarism leads to an aristocracy. Let me provide a simple explanation: Consumables are goods that disappear: food, services, entertainment, throw away products, etc. These goods are still produced, they just aren't durable. Most people are consumers, almost everything they purchase, they consume. If there is a gold standard, someone receives gold for food or whatever, but the gold is still around after the food is gone. Eventually, a few people end up with all the gold, and everybody else has nothing because they consumed it. Fiscal economies don't have this problem; they "print" money to equal the production of goods and services on a continuing basis. The amount of money can increase indefinitely as long as supply equals demand, but it does dilute the existing money as an equivalent to wealth, which is why the aristocrats who want to own everything, prefer gold.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-17_555_golden_aristocracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-17_555_golden_aristocracy.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash gold standard, monetarism, fiscal, humor, politics no Tue, 26 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Why do Libertarians hate The Fed, America's central bank: what does raising and lowering interbank interest rates do that's so damning in their view? It turns out, The Fed also indirectly prints money. The U.S. government can't get “investors” to buy enough Treasuries to cover the budget deficit every year, so The Fed buys them, essentially “printing” money. Under section 14 subsection (b) of the U.S. Code, Federal Reserve banks have the legal authority to purchase Government bonds directly from the Treasury with 0% interest. No real banks hold that debt, it’s just an accounting scheme that holds no one responsible, increases the money supply, and monetizes the debt. Technically, someday the Treasury must pay back The Fed, but never will. So what if The Fed simply excuses the Treasury notes entirely, just takes them off their Balance Sheet? Who would know or care? In fact, that's what's going to happen sometime in the near future, when The Collapse happens. The Fed is a perfect fall guy; it's independent of government but beholden to them because government sets their salaries, and the Fed Chairman is selected by the President. Plus, their power is spread around to 7 big banks, each with a committee of nameless, faceless bureaucrats to dissipate responsibility. The Fed can take the blame while solving all the problems that imaginary money can solve. Libertarians are wrong; the Fed is a good way to get the most out of money.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-17_554_the_fed.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-17_554_the_fed.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash The Fed, money supply, printing money, humor, politics no Sun, 24 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Treasuries are government IOUs, now over $21 trillion of debt, but money is imaginary and the money Treasuries supposedly represent doesn't exist anyway, and hasn't for many decades, since America hasn't balanced a budget, nor will it ever again. Obviously, no one needs the money The Debt represents because it's on continuous rollover, like imagining you own pink elephants you never ride. Actually, except for preconceptions of accounting, there's no reason to issue more pink elephants, I mean Treasuries; what's the difference if there's more pink elephants or not? When the U.S. needs more money, it can simply print it without issuing Treasuries. The reason we still have Treasuries is because the ultra wealthy want to be able to accumulate even more wealth by "investing" in pink elephants. Capitalism has this weird aspect that builds no roads, constructs no schools, explores no space, but instead increases an imaginary herd of pink elephants, which does nothing but create an aristocracy; a concentration of wealth that limits liberty for everyone else. Nothing positive results from exchanging pink elephants for liberty; in fact, it seems like the worst possible exchange. Government need write no IOUs at all, it's all the same except the Nouveau Aristocracy don't automatically assume ownership of the nation's wealth. Most-liberty-to-most-people is achieved by printing money for economic purposes rather than creation of royalty via Treasuries.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-16_553_why_issue_treasuries.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-16_553_why_issue_treasuries.mp3 2:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash treasuries, money, humor, politics no Fri, 22 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Employers are required to take income taxes out of employee's paychecks, an especially difficult burden on Small Business because of the accounting, plus the Small Business owner is held responsible if the tax is not paid, even though it's for someone else. Not only is this an inequitable nanny relationship, and a drag on hiring, since only people with significant incomes are going to owe taxes, there's no reason for it, except to sneak away regressive FICA taxes from poor people. Consider that people who work outside of the standard employer-employee relationship, usually in a small business, deal with taxes another way, where the person who receives the money is held accountable instead. Anybody who's done any legitimate business on the side knows that a “1099” is the form the government is sent when people receive money working for themselves. These people are required to pay what they think will be their taxes ahead of time, called the Estimated tax, and if they don't, they're fined. Why aren't all income handled this way? It's an electronic age where almost all transactions are via computer, why does a one person have to be responsible for the taxes of another just because they give them a job? Making the employer responsible for an employee's taxes is yet another transfer of State responsibility onto business.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-16_552_withholding_tax.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-16_552_withholding_tax.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash withholding tax, estimated tax, humor, politics no Wed, 20 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Considering how taxes are an everyday part of everyone's lives, few people even know what's going on. Confusion is the biggest cause for suspicion of taxes, especially since they are so arbitrary and uneven. For example, 7 States have no Income tax, and 5 States have no Sales tax. Alaska has neither. In fact, Alaska pays its residents almost $2K a year. Sales tax is the most regressive because everyone has to pay it but most States don't tax groceries, however, 6 States do. 21 States have Estate taxes; Washington State is highest at 20%, which is in addition to the federal government's 40%; and Washington's Estate tax starts at $2.1 million while the federal one doesn't start until $5.6 million. As for federal Income taxes: couples who make less than $2K per month don't pay. In fact, families with 2 kids don't pay any federal taxes until they make over $50K a year, as it should be, and the top federal Income tax is 37% on people who make over $600K. Most so-called “tax loopholes” only benefit the Middle Class but the most egregious example of abuse, the Capital Gains loophole, primarily benefits The Rich; about 5 million people pay its much reduced rate, so people who take their income as salary get hit at the top rate while folks who get big money doing nothing, pay 28%. Worse, all Workers have to pay the horrific Social Security and Medicare taxes from every dollar they earn, but people who don't work, don't have to pay them. Finally, after all the talk and hysterics, no one knows what the taxes are actually spent on; the black hole called “government.”   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-15_551_tax_confusion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-15_551_tax_confusion.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash taxes, estate taxes, politics, humor no Mon, 18 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1913, is where federal Income taxes come from; before that, nothing. The fact is, as long as production matches consumption, no taxes are necessary; simply issue money as needed, what's the downside? The knee-jerk reaction to printing more money is always the cry, “inflation!” but why? Does a loaf of bread become more expensive just because there's more money? As long as there are Market Forces, if a baker raises prices unilaterally, people will stop buying their product and get their bread from a cheaper competitor. No, inflation in a Free Market system only occurs when more people want something than there is available, and we have way over-capacity of most commodities because we are a Free Market system. The problem with printing money instead of taxing is dishonesty, both fiscal and actual, that will occur due to lack of feedback in government spending. Why not fund every Special Interest program that comes along? Why not give everyone money so they don't have to work? Though the answer is simple: because those things drive up consumption without matching production; the people who get elected are there because they won a popularity contest, not for their intelligence, competence, or knowledge. Still, knowing that, plus the fact that the Social Safety-net, like Social Security, can be paid for by printing money, won't leave anybody in the streets.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-15_550_taxes_arent_necessary.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-15_550_taxes_arent_necessary.mp3 2:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash print money, inflation, productivity, taxes, humor, politics no Sat, 16 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Even with the Top 1% paying almost half the Income taxes collected, wealth concentration is still increasing; they now own more of the country's wealth than in the past 50 years. Increasing wealth disparity is a side-effect of Capitalism, and to be expected, and if it's not alleviated through some kind of redistribution, an aristocracy forms. A lot of people have no problem with an emerging aristocratic class; the same kind of people who don't much like democracy or Welfare. Even people who don't pay taxes, and benefit from the taxes of others, are willing to accept this Nouveau Aristocracy. In fact, it's the single most defining feature of the Republican Party. Assuming that somehow people could be convinced that it's in the best interest of the country to avoid aristocracy; how do you stop it? The socialists blame Capitalism and want to end it. That's the kick-over-the-apple-cart solution from a growing minority, perhaps 30%. Probably, the number of people who accept an aristocracy are equal to the socialists, which leaves perhaps 40% of the people to find a center way; no rising aristocracy, no rising Marxist rebellion against it. The easiest, most effective plan would be to let people get as rich as they want during their lifetime but when they die, their wealth gets redistributed; more to their heirs than others but limited, probably the current caps of $8 million to heirs and $1 million on gifts to anyone else. The heirs won't like it but they didn't accumulate the money, and the person who did is gone. Everyone else celebrates because they may just win the inheritance gift lottery when the rest is given away.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-13_549_tax_plan_for_the_aristocracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-13_549_tax_plan_for_the_aristocracy.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, aristocratic, class, inheritance tax, politics, humor no Thu, 14 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Most people hate taxes because they dislike being forced into giving up money, even though they know the life they live everyday was made possible through taxes, but because the exchange is involuntary, they despise it. Even though the old arguments used to promote the idea of taxes are good, there is a fatal flaw everybody gets but no one can quite articulate; taxes seem rigged. The Left thinks The Rich pay too few taxes, and The Right think The Poor don't pay enough. The Left sees wealth concentration as bad, and The Right think Welfare is. The Left see government service as admirable, and The Right consider them parasites. It's tough reconciling diametrically opposed opinions like those. Whether taxes help or hurt depends on where that money came from. Consider this example: if your community used Property taxes to buy a gazebo for the public park, then everyone is helped and the Middle Class hurt because they paid the Property taxes; but if the gazebo is in a public park that has entry fees then The Poor are hurt because they are least able to pay the entry fees; and if the gazebo was purchased from a multinational corporation, The Rich benefit the most because their corporation made the money. The question really is: do the taxes help or hurt? Progressive taxes, which are taxes on The Rich to redistribute the wealth, help. Regressive taxes, which are taxes on everyone that subsidize The Rich, hurt.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-13_548_who_do_taxes_help.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-13_548_who_do_taxes_help.mp3 2:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash taxes, politics, humor no Tue, 12 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy One of the reasons taxes are so vehemently disliked is because they are misunderstood. People think it's a kind of market transaction: services given for payment received. Taxpayers judge taxes in that light and find the exchange wanting, not comprehending that the primary purpose taxes serve is to redistribute wealth. It's a mathematically certainty that wealth will concentrate; the natural aftermath of compounding gains. That's what Capitalism does; leave the system on overnight without anybody watching, and when you wake up in the morning, everyone is a pauper except the guy in the Lear jet. It's not even that complex of an analogy: if you've ever played Monopoly, you know that at the end, one guy gets everything, and everybody else sucks wind. Passing “Go” keeps you in a little longer, but if you want to keep the game going, the money needs to be redistributed. How does this apply to Real Life, you ask? Because society is more than one person, The Rich seem to forget that. Each of us surrendered our Right of Violence to the State because we would be better off, but if the vast majority of people are treading water or downing while one guy smokes $100 bills, well, then Johnny, get my gun.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-11_547_what_are_taxes_really_for.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-11_547_what_are_taxes_really_for.mp3 2:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash taxes, politics, humor no Sun, 10 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Free advice has the advantage that it's free, so let's review: Ideology hinges on the the question of from whom to who? Redistributing opportunity from those who horde it increases the liberty of everyone. Society's greatest threat is a declining population. It's simply impossible to provide pensions without production to match. Retirement is a modern concept and the kinks haven't quite been worked out yet. Investing in property requires skills most people don't have. Investing in your own house remains the best financial advice. The best Life Advice is the simplest to understand. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-11_546_financial_advice_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-11_546_financial_advice_concepts.mp3 2:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash financial advice, advice, politics, humor no Fri, 08 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy When thinking about your future, listen to old people on how to get the most out of life because they've already had one, plus the rules are rather simple: If you're not married, focus on getting so because your spouse's career may determine where you will live. Then buy a cheap house near where you work. Then have kids as soon as possible. Don't run up bills. If you have loans, pay those off first, then pay off the house as soon as possible. Try to have a career in something. Working for other people isn't for everyone; for control over your life, start a business but know there's a lot of chance and effort involved. How much you work versus how much you play is a family dynamic but leisure pursuits are better than working really hard just to have a second home in Florida, and don't buy things to impress other people. You'll get Social Security, plan on it. In fact, any other money you "save" for retirement is gambling, and may get eaten up in inflation or circumstances beyond your control. Instead, buy collectibles with the money you have earmarked for retirement, something you like. If you like it, certainly other people do too, and when you're retired, sell off the collection a bit of a time on eBay. This method of saving is fun going in, and going out, plus, collectibles keep up with inflation. Retirement is about not working but you will want to do something; playing golf is for losers.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-11_545_life_advice.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-11_545_life_advice.mp3 2:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash life advice, advice, humor, politics no Wed, 06 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Up until now, property has always been a good investment for special people who can deal with it; however, buying a house is still the best investment any family can make. There's the increase in equity as prices go up, special tax advantages, and buying is usually cheaper than renting. Pride and comfort in owning your own home also has significant personal value. Home ownership is one of the things American society has excelled at; government lending organizations facilitate it, it's subsidized by federal tax policy, and neighborhoods are increasingly being designed to enhance the sense of community. The key is that you are pursuing a career with dependable income and location, which is why home ownership is an aspiring Middle Class investment. Mortgages are not for the poor and unskilled, which is where the problems are coming from. Though increased home ownership used to be one of government's primary goals, now-a-days it's in direct conflict with the drive for urbanization; high rises, multi-unit condos, no yards; that comes from people envious of the lifestyles of those more fortunate than themselves; and since the Middle Class is decreasing as a percentage of the population, personal home ownership is often denigrated and discouraged in some political circles, especially the socialist-leaning and those uninspired by The American Dream. There are literally people who refuse to even enter the suburbs of well-maintained individual family homes with delicate yards and cars in the driveways, and that number is increasing, so owning a house as an investment has both financial and social implications that are in flux. Still, you should do it if you can.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-11_544_house_as_an_investment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-11_544_house_as_an_investment.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash owning a home, house as an investment, politics, humor no Mon, 04 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy One of the main investment refrains of the Baby-Boomer generation was to invest in property. “There's never going to be any more of it,” went the Pop pseudo-investing advice, and a lot of that generation did very well with the concept. However, in this new world order, where economic collapse is on the menu, is property still the go-to investment vehicle? To answer this question, we've got to predict the future, an impossibility. Many people expect deflation due to America's tremendous production over-capacity; no scarcity there, but those items that do have a limited supply, like property, will probably experience inflationary pressures; so is property a good hedge against inflation? Unfortunately, Property taxes will show a commensurate increase. If your income is not inflating at the same rate, ever-increasing taxes will force you out of your investment, but you'll be taxed on the inflationary gains which are really no gain at all. Plus, the upkeep on the property requires an expensive management group, or time and a skillset you may not have. In short, Investing in property has too many downsides to recommend, unless you're “investing” in your own home.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-11_543_investment_property.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-11_543_investment_property.mp3 2:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash investment property, humor, politics no Sat, 02 Feb 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Retirement is a modern concept, part of liberalism; the idea that some portion of society can stop working and rely on the productivity of younger members to support them. Though the very concept is mathematically problematic, it's the expectation of everyone who lives in the Western world. Since retirees are the largest voting block, Social Security isn't going anywhere, though it will be at some subsistence level, but that's all you need, really, because you can also use the Social Safety Net: Medicare, senior food service, senior transportation, and social workers to watch out for you. If you want more than Social Security, just know that planning for retirement is definitely predicting the future, with all the pitfalls that entails, but without the understanding by most people that it's actually gambling. However, there are some things that seem less risky. First: buy a house; pay off the mortgage as soon as possible; improve it; and when you want to retire, get a Reverse Mortgage and live on the annuity. Second: stay out of the Stock Market; in fact, ignore all the hyped-up ways to make money passively. Third: go on cheap vacations that leave memories no one can take from you, but squirrel away enough money to buy clothes for your grandkids. That's all the advice you need for a happy retirement.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-07_542_retirement_advice.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-07_542_retirement_advice.mp3 2:13 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash retirement, social security, humor, politics no Thu, 31 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Productivity has no shelf life: it can’t be stored, but because money is often a proxy for productivity, there is the misconception that pensions can be saved for, so people draw the erroneous conclusion that if they have money, they can retire in their old age. That assumption is easily refuted because it’s not about how much money you have, every retiree could have a billion dollars saved, no it’s about the amount of productivity available at that time. Someone has to be productive so that others can only consume for the rest of their lives. Consider that, by definition, a pensioner produces nothing, and they can’t eat their money, but because money is also a proxy for State Violence, they can force productive members of society to produce for them. Some young working family somewhere is essentially working so that a retired person doesn't have to. How much does a family have to make before they have that kind of excess production for pensioners? People who make less than $3,000 a month certainly can’t support someone else; they would have to make at least $70K/yr too minimally sustain two households, but many pensioners, perhaps most, don’t want to live at subsistence level so more families would have to contribute, perhaps 2:1. Do the math, there are 40 million pensioners in the U.S. but only 60 million Middle Class households: the cause of the coming collapse seems obvious...   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-07_541_impossible_pensions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-07_541_impossible_pensions.mp3 2:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash pensions, politics, humor no Tue, 29 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy America's population is still growing, thanks to immigrants, legal and otherwise, but that increase has been slowly declining; and there's an actual decrease in core White population. Some economists are worried this will lead to a lack of tax revenues, and deflation due to slow consumption, but if anything, due to generous welfare and retirement benefits, consumption is going up. The basic economic formula is quite simple: production = consumption. America never really had to worry about production before because Market innovation cures it, and in recent decades, we have increasingly imported goods. Even with a declining population, there's plenty of capacity; what isn't there going to be enough of? Places to live? There's plenty of land. Not enough food? America alone could supply the world if it had too. Energy conservation, renewables, and massive oil reserves have taken that specter off the table. Automation answers the question of who's going to perform manual labor. Even medicine is currently underutilized and artificially limited; however, there is a concern of who's going to take care of the exploding ranks of the elderly.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-05_540_declining_population.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-05_540_declining_population.mp3 2:06 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash declining population, population, production, consumption, humor, politics no Sun, 27 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Most people do not recognize the connection between opportunity and liberty: The Left doesn't want personal liberty, individual autonomy, to exist because that would conflict with their collectivistic goals, and The Right doesn't want opportunity to be part of the liberty equation because that would imply the wants of other people matter. The fact is America's Jeffersonian liberty, where people make decisions from themselves and reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of their own actions, requires both freedom and opportunity; freedom to choose, and opportunities to choose from. America is the only Liberty Nation in this regard but it will be the last one if opportunity doesn't get redistributed because wealth stratification and concentration are slowly choking ambition and hope to death. Lack of opportunity is why Millennials are trending socialist; if society, as it stands, won't provide opportunity to the many versus the few, then following generations will be forced to change society. So as Baby-Boomers die off, Liberty America will become yet another socialist wasteland. It's not like we don't know how to fix it, massive redistribution of wealth from The 1% to everyone else, but the Nouveau Aristocracy have their hands on the levers of power, and they're not giving it up.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-05_539_redistribute_opportunity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-05_539_redistribute_opportunity.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash opportunity, liberty, freedom, politics, humor no Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Political ideologies mostly differentiate based on their concept of redistribution of wealth, and motive is important. Often envious people want wealth taken from some and given to others but that is not an acceptable reason. On the other hand, liberty-minded people recognize if wealth is not redistributed, it concentrates opportunity, which is an important justification for wealth redistribution. You can tell which-is-which by who is intended to be redistributed from, and whom is redistributed to. From nobody to nobody is the purview of Libertarians who fantasize that everyone will leave each other alone, no matter the breath of inequality; as long as that lasts before revolution, anyway. From Middle Class to Rich: Conservatives display few qualms about wealth concentration; they even applaud it. In Conservative eyes, to be a rich man is to be admired and respected, and where the money comes from is obvious because poor people don't have any money. This is definitively not acceptable. From Middle Class to Poor: Progressives wallow in their Marxist altruism. Simply redistributing wealth is not enough; they think The Poor should be the primary beneficiary of such largess: from those according to their ability, to those according to their need; and since the number of The Rich is infinitesimally small, it seems only logical that since the Middle Class has displayed ability, they're on the hook for supplying the needy. The only acceptable form of wealth redistribution is from Rich to Middle Class: Liberals aim to make everyone Middle Class who works for it given the opportunity. However, concentration of wealth by The Rich limits opportunity, so breaking that stranglehold becomes a primary importance.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-03_538_from_whom_to_who.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-03_538_from_whom_to_who.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash wealth, redistribution, humor, politics no Wed, 23 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Of all the issues that surround the concept of investment, let's review the few we've covered: Money is imaginary, and economies are artificial. It's difficult to tell an Investor from acolytes of other proselytizing religions. The PE ratio is basically how long it takes for your investment in a stock to pay off. Pork will get cheap before it gets expensive. Buying gold is not an investment; it's tangible insurance. If money is imaginary, derivatives are fantasy. Trusts are for people with money and brains. Hedge Funds are the epitome of how to exploit imaginary money. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.     Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-03_537_investment_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-03_537_investment_concepts.mp3 2:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash investment, derivitives, gold, trusts, politics, humor no Mon, 21 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Hedge funds are the epitome of money gamesmanship; where the ultra-rich exploit artificial rules to increase their wealth. They use derivatives to make their $billions, yet create nothing and do nothing of value; they are simply parasites on society. It's been proven time & again that hedge funds are pure gambling, with lots of manipulation, and smidgens of insider trading. They are highly leveraged, as were the Investment banks that caused the 2008 Financial Crisis; for only 3% of their own money, Lehman Bros borrowed and bet another 97% of other people's money. Unfortunately, when their loss was 4%, meaning they owed more than they had skin in the game, they rolled the loss into the next loan via Money Markets, hoping to win on the next bet. This went on ad nauseam until their losses reached almost a $trillion, enough to crash the Money Markets too, then the government stepped in. Hedge funds and Investment Banks also use the concept of privatizing gains and socializing losses. The idea is that they borrow huge amounts of money from unsuspecting people via retirement funds then bet with it: if they win, they take the gains and pay special low taxes, and if they lose, they bankrupt out of the obligation and let the government cover the losses, because impoverishing tens of millions of retirees isn't good public policy. Of course, the exceptionally high salaries received by the people practicing this deception were not penalized, nor has anyone ever been held responsible; in fact, the rules have not changed, so they can do it again.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-03_536_hedge_funds.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-03_536_hedge_funds.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Hedge Funds, hedge fund, humor, politics no Sat, 19 Jan 2019 04:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy A Trust is a relatively simple document that says who gets your stuff when you die, similar to a Will without State involvement. Trusts exist in the vague legal world that most people think only The Rich enjoy but Middle Class people who own a house, a few investments, and some savings can get a lot of benefit too. Anybody with an estate more than $60K should have a Trust; that way you escape probate, which means no attorney fees, court appearances or waiting periods. Plus, Trusts hide who gets what from public scrutiny. Yes, most people have to hire an attorney to create and maintain their Trust but that cost will almost always be less than using a Will. Of note: instead of the State managing a Will, you say who will manage your Trust, called a Trustee. Trustees make sure whatever it says in the Trust happens. Often the attorney who writes your Trust is th e Trustee but that costs money, which is why people often select a family member to be Trustee, and as long as they don't abuse their power or cause inner-family resentment, that's what most people do. The one complexity with Trusts is that title to your house, investments, retirement funds, etc. must be transferred to the Trust so that the items can be easily given to heirs. This involves little more than phone calls and paper shuffling but it can be intimidating to someone who's never done it before, which is why so many people still use Wills even with all the downsides.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_535_trusts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_535_trusts.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash trusts, wills, humor, politics no Thu, 17 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Derivatives, which are bets on the economy, are thousands of times larger than the real economy, so if the economy stumbles, magnify that by at least a 1000. For example, the number of foreclosures that triggered the 2008 financial crisis were minuscule compared to the economy, and could easily be absorbed, but the bets against them, the derivatives, were huge, and that's what caused the problem. Wall Street banks are essentially giant casinos, and a vast amount of the economy is gambling. What you learn about derivatives in Frosh econ, that they are a form of insurance, seems reasonable, but if derivatives were a real thing, used like they are supposed to be used, then the maximum they should ever be would be the value of the commodity they were insuring, but they are 10,000 times that number! Insurance makes the economy more stable but insurance companies don't sell multiple fire policies on the same house, and they certainly don't let some random arsonists buy one on someone else's house. Before 2008, thousands of random people, including arsonists, had bought Fire insurance on somebody else's house, betting it would burn down, especially when they saw all the trash in the yard; and it's happening again. Conservatives always try to blame regulation for the 2008, or any economic collapse for that matter, but it was when the regulation on leverage was lifted so that Lehman only had to put up 3% equity to borrow 97%, that was the beginning of the end last time, and it's happening again. Remember, all along the way, the people who made these highly-leveraged bets got to keep the winnings. The folks left holding the bag when the music stopped were the Retirement funds. Can you image the political fallout if everyone's retirement was broke!? Of course, the government had to intervene; and it's happening again.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_534_derivatives.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_534_derivatives.mp3 2:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Derivatives, financial crisis, humor, politics no Tue, 15 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Gold has a reverence no other commodity enjoys. People worried the current financial system will inevitably crash imagine they can save themselves by burying a can of gold coins in their backyard. This solution has never operated as imagined in past upheavals but it does make the hider feel better. However, if the choice is between buying insurance and burying double-eagles, gold makes much more sense. Should you choose this option, here are a few suggestions: First, never buy gold futures because gold is a poor investment; always take possession. Never buy bullion; a huge part of the gold ingot market is fake at the wholesale level; in fact, all eBay gold ingots are fake. Only buy Eagles from a reputable online source, a U.S. Mint recognized dealer. For smaller denominations, rather than buy unfamiliar small gold coins, buy familiar U.S. silver coins. If you're a coin collector then buy old pre-1964 silver U.S. coins. If you're not a collector, you can buy new U.S. silver coins but people won't recognize them and may be suspicious. Nickels are worth more in the metal than 5 cents, but they're bulky to store and not a lot of people understand their value, so a few hundred dollars worth is adequate. Unfortunately, if history is any indication, the government will try and force you to turn in your gold during hard times, so if it comes to that, you'll be bartering in the underground economy. Obviously, secrecy remains paramount; even if you evade government confiscation, should armed bandits know you have valuables, they'll simply take them from you. That's why many people often mention gold and guns in the same sentence.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-30_533_buying_gold.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-30_533_buying_gold.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash gold, politics, humor no Sun, 13 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There's an economic principle that says the price of pork will deflate before it inflates. The logic goes: when farmers are losing money on pigs, they dump them onto the market, which lowers the price even further, forcing other pig farmers into the cycle too, collapsing the market. Soon the cheap pork runs out but there are no new pigs being raised so eventually the price of pork skyrockets. It's too late for the old pig farmers because their businesses already tumbled down, which collapsed all the ancillary industries, and it takes a while to rebuild production and distribution capacity. That's when pork inflation reigns. To alleviate the fluctuation risk in the pig and other commodity production markets, futures derivatives were created as a form of insurance. These instruments, that are traded like stocks, allow gamblers to try and predict the scarcity versus glut of pigs, little more than casino betting, and the people betting contribute nothing to the economy except volatility. This was how the 2008 Banking Crisis occurred, which was barely saved by printing imaginary money, as will be all financial crises. Unfortunately for pig farmers, pork is not imaginary, so their business can't be cured by money magic, only by raising more pigs.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-30_532_pork_futures.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-30_532_pork_futures.mp3 2:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash futures, derivitives, humor, politics no Fri, 11 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Nothing shouts “scam” at the Stock Market like the PE ratio: basically, how many years it takes for a stock to pay for itself. For example, if the price of a share of stock is $50, and Earnings were $2 per share, the PE would be 25, which is the average PE ratio today, so 25 years for payoff; that's like buying a house. Normally when you invest in anything, you want a yield in the order of 7-10% which would be equivalent to a PE ratio of 10-14, the lower the better, so today's PE ratios ridiculously long timeframes strain the definition of investing, and that assumes the earnings are paid out as Dividends. Not declaring Dividends just makes it worse because PE is not compounded. Supposedly, if a company does not declare Dividends equal to the Earnings, the Price Per Share goes up to reflect the Retained Earnings, and the stockholder's Equity increases, but in reality this additional liquidity is used to justify stock buybacks, which manipulate the PE in an incestuous loop of phony numbers all intended to justify stratospheric executive bonuses. However, as artificial as this all is, the Stock Market is simply a reflection of the imaginary money that comprises it. Economics is a kind of magic that only works when enough people believe. It works because optimism, fantasy, and gambling generate dopamine, the elixir of elation, the positive feedback on life, liberty, and PE.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-28_531_pe_ratio.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-28_531_pe_ratio.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash P/E ratio, PE ratio, PE, P/E, politics, humor no Wed, 09 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Most people have a very positive feeling towards the word “investor,” especially folks who have signed up for The American Dream, thinking anyone can make it big if they just work hard and persevere. Unfortunately, “investing” is little more than an attempt to predict the future, and the people who prey upon those who think it's possible, like the loud, balding guys who insist the stocks they recommend for you on TV will go up, up, up; and so-called, Financial Advisers, who don't have a clue. They're preachers in the Church of Chump, don't listen to them. Most people would like to see “entrepreneurs” succeed; the franchisers, the servicers, the shop owners; but those aren't investors. The difference between an investor and an entrepreneur is that the former give their money to somebody else, while the latter invest in themselves. Then there are the people who claim to be able to protect your money from taxes, from lawsuits, and from economic downturn. Those aren’t investors either, those are hoarders, and a threat to Capitalism because they lock away the opportunity the rest of us require to obtain liberty. It's concerning that so many people identify as “investors” yet so few people actually do it.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-28_530_investor.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-28_530_investor.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash investors, investor, entrepreneur, politics, humor no Mon, 07 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The imaginary nature of money tends to make the things it touches insubstantial; an economy that trades chickens can be measured in chicken shit, but imaginary money leaves little trace. There is the illusion of accounting, and people think in accounting terms, but with a slight-of-hand, trillions of dollars can be created and given away with almost no impact on anything else. If a stock index is down, Central Banks buy the handful of companies that control the index. If banks are undercapitalized, Central Banks grant more capital. If the nations budget needs to be funded, Central Banks issue IOUs that never need to be repaid. And why not? As long as people are producing more than they are consuming, how much money there is makes no difference. This makes money one of the greatest discoveries of man, and the ultimate source of our success. It's an open question whether it would hurt or help for the average person to understand that our civilization is truly built in the clouds. There are signs when an economy is in trouble: falling sales. It can be masked for a significant length of time because of the way business reports earnings, but when corporations have to report real profits, not just buy-back-stock-using-borrowed-money-to-make-EPS-go-up, there's no way the Fed can hold stocks up forever with low interest rates. Another way to tell if an economy is in trouble is bubbles; do the things that people really need, relentlessly increase in price even though overall inflation is not increasing? Housing, cars, education, healthcare, food? Central banks and government can prop up our artificial economy on imaginary money for a long time, but eventually the weight will be too heavy, and people will stop playing with their phone and notice.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-26_529_artificial_economy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-26_529_artificial_economy.mp3 2:55 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash artificial economy, economy, money, imaginary money, politics, humor no Sat, 05 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy What are some of the issues of being an employee? Let's review: Jobs naturally select who works them, there's no conspiracy involved. Employer's don't want employees anymore than employees want to work. Because of social burdens, it's in an employer's best interest to hire contractors instead of employees. Wage stagnation, particularly as it affects the Middle Class, should be America's primary concern. Only The Market can determine how much you are worth. The reputation of private labor unions is negatively affected by public employee unions. Extreme compensation differences between executives and employees is the seed of Capitalism's demise. Managers are blissfully unaware of the resentment their subordinates hold towards them. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-26_528_employee_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-26_528_employee_concepts.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash employees, contractors, employers, managers, humor, politics no Thu, 03 Jan 2019 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Managers are simply employees that trade increased income for increased resentment. Most people like to control their own destinies; if everyone could choose what they wanted to do, it's unlikely that taking orders from someone else would be their preferred occupation, so naturally subordinates will resent the authority of their manager. The more authority the manager represents, the greater the resentment. This eventually metastasizes into social awkwardness and shunning of the manager. In a large, mostly anonymous community where managers and subordinates rarely meet outside of work, the downside of management is not as pronounced, but is small communities, managers have to walk a fine line. The cult of manager denigration, most famously fostered by humorists like Scott Adams, has made it fashionable to treat managers with a private disrespect that borders on hatred. Also, there is truth in the old saying, “familiarity breeds contempt.” For managers to maintain the respect of those they command, the relationship must be formal because if those who must obey have the opportunity to see their erstwhile commander in an unguarded casualness, the familiarity will cause them to compare against an idealized version, invariably leaving the human manager found wanting, and once someone loses respect, it cannot be regained. People need to seriously consider whether the aggravation of being a manager is worth an addition $5 an hour?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-26_527_managers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-26_527_managers.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash managers, employees, humor, politics no Tue, 01 Jan 2019 04:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy People often confuse Capitalism with a meritocracy, where highly competent people are highly rewarded, but there are 10,000 qualified applicants for every high-paying job, so luck plays by far the biggest role in who gets the big bucks; probably a fraternity brother from Yale has more impact on their success than merit. This was still okay, people understood nepotism, always wishing they were related to the right person, but add one more ingredient to that exploitative mix, that being extreme differences in compensation, and dissatisfaction and a sense of betrayal start cracking the foundation of society. When the boss's son was paid twice what you were, that was one thing, but at 235 times the median, no amount of apologist prattle can defuse that bomb. When tax rates were lowered for high-income earners, there was no longer anything keeping individuals from wanting huge salaries. Usually there's a sympathetic Board involved, but there's also a huge part of ego and competition. Just look how marquee basketball stars are paid; their compensation is newsworthy and fame-making. Because of our confused belief in meritocracy, it seems from the outside that those players are worth their extraordinary incomes: how many 7-footers dribble like a Point Guard after all? However, this clear connection between ability and recompense blurs significantly in a business environment: tall, handsome, and owner's nephew do not equate to dunking from the Free Throw line.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-24_526_extreme_compensation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-24_526_extreme_compensation.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash extreme compensation, humor, politics no Sun, 30 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The recent Janus Supreme Court decision has disrupted American labor union practices for the better. As long as public employee unions could withhold dues from unwilling workers, all unions got a bad name. The fact is, private unions have experienced a steep decline in membership over the decades, partially because of the reputation gained by public unions, but that's over now. As public unions, and their extraordinary demands, are no longer catered to by politicians under the union campaign contribution spell, the reputation of all unions will recover, and if worker exploitation ever returns, private union membership will respond en mass. The model for private unions exists: German labor unions are an example for Americans. They have significant representation on the Board of Directors, their pension funds are invested in company stock, and they are certainly more concerned about the company's future and the interests of minority shareholders than anyone else on the Board. They are a bulwark against the shenanigans of corporate raiders and parasitic managers. They also have a reputation for cooperation; helping in layoffs, modernizing factories, and consulting with management. Capitalism's one great weakness is that it inordinately rewards the source of imaginary money while exploiting the value of actual worker production; having equal union representation on the Board would counteract that disparity.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-24_525_private_labor_unions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-24_525_private_labor_unions.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash labor unions, unions, private labor unions, politics, humor no Fri, 28 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There is no more awkward conversation than with someone who feels the world doesn't recognize their value. They complain they're not being paid commensurately with their high-priced college education, and exhibit a cross between daydreaming and a sense of entitlement that should long ago been extinguished. No employer is required to pay you what you think you're worth. Worse, immature people confuse where the responsibility for change lies: it's up to you to fix any perceived underperformance in your life, not someone else's. Where you fit in the pecking order of the world is not for you to say. You're only “worth” what The Market determines you're worth. Maybe your expertise is valuable someplace else; move. Maybe you're worth more at another company; change jobs. But most likely, you're getting paid what all the other Ethnic Studies college graduates are making. This wage dissatisfaction is especially prevalent in hourly wage employees who try to make their job performance subjective, complaining they aren't being paid for travel or “set up” time, or their seniority, or something else they imagine they've done and should be paid for. Yet some jobs require years of difficult schooling, such and medicine and engineering, who pays for those years? Some jobs require practice; who pays for that? Many jobs are "exempt,” meaning they are not paid for overtime; how are those accounted for? Life is not fair, just look at the who-you-know rich-uncle aspect of the working world.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-22_524_paid_what_youre_worth.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-22_524_paid_what_youre_worth.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash wages, paid what you are worth, humor, politics no Wed, 26 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy When people traded chickens, even the very best chicken farmer couldn't make more than 10 times any other chicken farmer, it just wasn't physically possible, but then imaginary money came along and now the difference in incomes can be astronomical. The concept of a meritocracy, where the most productive people receive the greatest rewards, was established in the days of chickens to encourage a society's work ethic, but it hasn't translated well into the age of abstraction. In fact, now the connection between merit and reward has become so tenuous that work ethic is no longer the determining factor; the very best worker receives perhaps double the rewards of fellow workers, and one-thousandth the rewards of the money manipulators. The Baby-Boomers grew accustomed to relative wage growth from the early 1960s until this century, which created a Middle Class primarily made of wage earners, and set the expectations of following generations, but that wage growth not only stopped, it has since declined back to 1960s levels. Now the Middle Class is primarily made of professionals and small business owners who resist higher wages. Still though, the difference in income between these groups is still within chicken farmer understanding. However, the leveragers of capital, the so-called Capitalists, raise no chickens, and perform no service that justifies the vast income and wealth disparity. Their good fortune instead derives from ever more convoluted ways to benefit from the magic of compounded gains while at the same time passing the risk onto the rest of society, which wouldn't be possible with chickens.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-22_523_wage_stagnation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-22_523_wage_stagnation.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash wage stagnation, income inequality, politics, humor no Mon, 24 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy “Contractor” has a tax definition. Businesses like to hire contractors because then they aren't responsible for the social obligations that come with hiring employees. Employers also like using contractors because there are many to choose from, they only have to use them when they need them, and if one costs more than they earn, or creates inconvenience, they don't have to use them again. There are also people who like being contractors so that they have more control over their lives. However, most people don't want to be classified as a contractor because they want someone else held responsible for their well-being. There's also an in-between employee-contractor possibility: employees getting together in a partnership then bidding their service to an employer as a contracting business. That way the employees are essentially their own employers and they can argue among themselves about personal issues: when one has a baby and needs a raise, or time off, or whatever. Plus, they could bid other jobs if they hate the boss, the pay, or the work. There had been a gradual increase in the number of people who were considered contractors as older people got laid off and were unable to find new employment in this Part-time economy, but recently another kind of contractor emerged with the advent of the Gig-economy; for example, App-based jobs like Uber. The Gig-economy, also called the “sharing economy,” is not an employer-employee relationship because everyone is considered their own boss. This was a blessing to lots of involuntarily-retired, on-maternity-leave, flexible-schedule people, but the workers they compete with, unions and other vested interests, don't like it one bit, and, unfortunately, many Gig-economy people would rather be employees if they could force the issue somehow through politics.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-16_522_employees_vs_contractors.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-16_522_employees_vs_contractors.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash employees, contractors, humor, politics no Sat, 22 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There is and should be an adversarial relationship between employers and employees. Employers are only that because they have to be; if a business could make money without any employees, it would. Similarly, employees are only that because they have to be; if a person could live life on the beach drinking pina coladas, they would. Bringing these two reticent groups together can't help but cause resentment because neither really wants the other. However, there's an almost religious counter-narrative to this situation that entirely overlooks the inherent conflict, instead implying that both sides are naturally friendly just given the right motivational slogans and workplace safety posters. Employees are employees because they don't want to be employers, it's that simple. Some employees have tried to be employers during their careers and know how awful it is, but people who have never tried to run their own business completely underestimate how difficult it is, to the point of thinking they are exploited by their employer, and should be given the benefits that victimhood brings, while their employer despairs. The whole employer-employee relationship is so fraught with emotion that there is just no way to properly prepare, which is why business advisers recommend not hiring employees: contractors, yes, temps, yes, services, yes, but long-term, you're responsible for their well-being, employees, stay as far away from those as you can.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-16_521_employer_vs_employee.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-16_521_employer_vs_employee.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash employers, employees, humor, politics no Thu, 20 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Jobs are a reflection of society, and people like to be around people who are like them, so it's natural that some industries become primarily gay, athletic, or socially awkward. There's also genderfication; industries that are primarily male or female, not because there's any kind of nefarious discrimination, but through self-selection. For example, Electricians, Mechanics, and Construction have less than 1% females; and Trash Collectors and Sewage Workers have virtually no female participants. This discrepancy is not artificial: there simply are no women lined up whose life's ambition is to pump your septic tank. Men do those jobs because stigma means less than the money; men will basically do anything if the pay is pride-worthy. There's an old adage that men do things, and women do people. Ignore the “women are more caring” jargon, it actually comes down to women like to be flirted with, the primeval sexual imperative, so they are attracted to jobs where they are the center of male attention. Similarly, evolutionarily, men ensure survival, usually with tools. Testosterone is the fundamental cause of aggressiveness and ambition, so any jobs that are benefited by these attributes will naturally be dominated by men. There's no reason an aggressive, ambitious female can't compete in the same environment, and they do, there's just not very many of them. That's why when men get older, and their testosterone levels go down, they fall out of contention for “young man's work.”   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-14_520_jobs_attract_personalities.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-14_520_jobs_attract_personalities.mp3 2:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash jobs, female occupations, occupations, job discrimination, humor, politics no Tue, 18 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Could America collapse? Let's review the concept: There's no decline in America but if you squint hard enough... It's a known fact that a strong WiFi signal prevents revolution. Some States tried seceding once; that didn't work out too well for them. The U.S. won't split apart into geographic regions, but Democrats may not shop in Republican stores. There's such a cornucopia of possibilities that it's impossible to predict what will cause The Collapse. Playing Prepare for The Collapse is a fun game but not very satisfying. After The Collapse things will be like before The Collapse, just without the freneticism. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-14_519_the_collapse_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-14_519_the_collapse_concepts.mp3 2:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash america's collapse, the collapse, economic collapse, humor, politics no Sun, 16 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The world is reeling; economically and socially; after The Collapse, there's going to be some kind of adjustment. After the initial fear and anxiety is over with, a few weeks perhaps, we will settle into a gradual readjustment of how things are; some different, most the same. In the vast majority of the country, Martial Law will not be imposed, and life will be a lot like before The Collapse, just not as many cars on the roads, and a lot more Welfare. Guns will not be required and in most places, and food will be just as plentiful, though not as varied. There will be inflation but other countries have made it through inflation without imploding. However, any savings or retirement, other than Social Security, will be gone. The Collapse probably won't be even The Depression level of hardship but it won't be like The Depression either. Politically, things that need to change, will; good people will rise to the occasion. Socially, any kind of collapse will immediately kibosh the social war on White males, and no worries that 20th Century-style racism will return because hardly anybody cares what color you are nowadays. The Student Loan fraud will be discontinued, and universities will get back on-track as primarily educational institutions. The Social Safety-net will be strained and go into deficit, but nothing that can't be fixed by printing money. The Collapse might even be good for debt-ridden, poor-job lower Middle Class Americans because it will be the the catalyst for social changes that redistribute wealth and opportunity. It will probably take 5 years to climb back up to a sustainable economy, one that runs without government propping it up with printed money and Make Work programs. Like all the adjustments before it, you can brag to your grandchildren how difficult your life was, implying their lives are relatively easy because of the hardships you endured.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-14_518_after_the_collapse.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-14_518_after_the_collapse.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash economic collapse, humor, politics no Fri, 14 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The U.S. is in the midst of stocks, bonds and housing bubbles; plus, mix in the volatility of a raft of record-setting obligations: Student Loans, personal credit card debt, auto loans, public retirement, and the National Debt; then add a sprinkle of dysfunctional politics, social unrest, and international tensions; and the resulting witch's brew seems certain to collapse given any number of catalysts. The world at large is no better situated, and in many cases even closer to the brink; in fact, there's a good chance that The Collapse will begin somewhere else. But what will cause The Collapse? Because of Central Banks intervention, the Stock Markets won't be the trigger; same with bonds; in fact, anything that can be solved by printing money isn't the worry. Where else can we look for the trigger? Generally, a collapse is guaranteed when consumption exceeds production, but we’ve got oodles of production capacity, especially with “Free” Trade. What could stimulate consumption while depressing production? A huge natural catastrophe? State confiscation for a big war effort? A religious revival, like environmentalism, that convinces people to stop consuming? A Trade war that decreases imports? Maybe even something social that discourages work ethic while encouraging consumption, like mass retirement or implementing a Universal Basic Income.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-12_517_what_will_cause_the_collapse.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-12_517_what_will_cause_the_collapse.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash The Collapse, UBI, Universal Basic Income, production, consumption, Free Trade, humor, politics no Wed, 12 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy When the pressures get too great, something snaps somewhere, and our economy is creaking and groaning in warning. Engaging our flights of apocalyptic fantasy, like all red-blooded Americans do, how could you prepare for the coming economic collapse? Let's see: if the zombie apocalypse happens, ammunition, food and drugs will be the currency, but gold is the best bet for anything less than total meltdown because people are habituated to think gold, stamped U.S. coins, not bars, is worth something. Old U.S. silver coins will also probably be accepted by merchants. The biggest problem with coins is that someone with a gun will take them from you, but leaving your gold at a depository is a bad idea; when the shit hits the fan, SHTF in the parlance, those doors will be locked. Some people say deflation will be the problem but those people are the ones with something to lose, because inflation is most likely. Demand unmatched by supply causes inflation, and there will be high demand for obvious items like gasoline and food, while status automobiles and collector plates will lose their appeal. Investing in Real Estate will hedge inflation but the Property Taxes will also rise accordingly, so bare land is a bad idea on a fixed income. Also, destitute people will need somewhere to live, but deadbeats will vigorously defend their family, so rental property is tough to maintain control of. Generally speaking, people who live in rural areas anticipate The Collapse, often gleefully, while urbanites deny anything is amiss, and suburbanites become Preppers.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-12_516_preparing_for_the_collapse.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-12_516_preparing_for_the_collapse.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash The Collapse, preppers, humor, politics no Mon, 10 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Speculation of the U.S. splitting apart has been done to death in many books and several TV shows, and there's even some great websites. Usually, the theory goes, that it occurs after some apocalyptic event, like a virus, that destroys the military, because people don't really see themselves fighting trained soldiers and modern hardware, even if they do have a home assault rifle. However, if it did happen, there's several theories on who the sides will be. During political times, everyone always assumes it will be Democrat versus Republican, but every State has an almost an equal mix of both so the State itself would also have to balkanize, and at a more granular level, what about neighbors of different persuasions? Somebody, maybe you, isn't going to pack up and move from their home just because people around you are mean; there would have to be force involved. The other theory is geographical location, like the Pacific Northwest, The South, The Midwest; all the regions that people consider contiguous today. That's more likely but then why would they want to be separated and vulnerable to outside forces after centuries of being together? No, it seems unlikely the U.S will ever split apart physically, though it is splitting virtually; business owners not serving groups of people, like gay wedding cakes, has the natural consequence that “No Democrats” signs are inevitable. This is the concept of Virtual States; people could go their whole day patronizing businesses that don't serve others they don't like, reading news tailored to them, associating with people just like them, speaking whatever language suits them. It will be the United States of Narcissists.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-10_515_us_balkanization.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-10_515_us_balkanization.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Balkanization, humor, politics no Sat, 08 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The idea of a State seceding from the United States comes up regularly among political novices. It's a fun concept to imagine but unilateral secession was decided in the most dramatic way possible, the Civil War, and if that wasn't enough, the Supreme Court nixed the idea too. It could possibly happen if the rest of the U.S. agreed but since secession would affect the lives and livelihoods of so many people outside that State, it seems extremely unlikely there would be bilateral agreement. Usually, the idea comes up in the context of abortion or guns, but we also hear it when the socialists seem to be gaining ground. The easy solution for individuals unhappy with the law where they live is to recognize that there's a whole world out there, so go find some nation that likes both guns and outlaws abortion; why would you choose to tear America apart when just you could just move? If you were a true patriot and loved America, you wouldn't want to see it in a civil war, and there really is only a relatively small number of you. Most people like being able to wake up in the morning and not caring which State they're in. Actually, as a nation of liberty, we probably should put Secession Rights on a national ballot every century or so, or have a Constitutional Convention. What would a 28th Amendment look like? "Federal Law does not apply to the States." Wait, for that, all we have to do is repeal Article VI, the Supremacy Clause.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-10_514_states_seceding.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-10_514_states_seceding.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash secession, humor, politics no Thu, 06 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There ain't gonna be a revolution, what would people revolt against? Wifi's good pretty most everywhere, and whatever's happening in Washington D.C. never seems to have any direct affect on anything back home. People revolt when they have something to gain, like freedom, not just a higher Minimum Wage. The only place you'll likely hear “revolution” talk is in the mornings at McDonald's, where there's a lot of OWGs who are "fed up," and "can't take it anymore!" They dream about buying a Zombie Apocalypse Assault Van and going after “gov'mit.” Well, after their next Social Security check comes in, anyway. How about a civil war rather than a revolution? Definitionly speaking, a "revolution" is rebellion against the government, and a "civil war" is a separation of two sides. Still, Civil War people have good broadband too, so that's probably out, and what other issues are worth killing one another over? Abortion? Guns? The irony of both of those causing killing is profound. In fact, it's safe to say that any internal conflict that involves people hurting one another is so remote as to not even make a good television show. However, if you do think something's going to happen, there's some stocks you can buy; for example, the McDonald's revolutionaries are going to need a fair amount of Metamucil.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-08_513_revolution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-08_513_revolution.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash revolution, civil war, america, politics, humor no Tue, 04 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy You only need to look around to see that there is no decline in America. Even homeless people sleeping on the streets doesn't mean there's more homelessness, it just means that the rest of the population now accepts seeing them on the sidewalks; no more batons, insane asylums and Work Farms. America's history is one of continuous improvement; both in the physicalities of life and intellectually, plus more people are participating than ever before. However, it doesn't take much thought to suspect this upward trajectory can't continue forever. Maybe it could with the old “American Dream” mythos, where everyone was always working to better themselves, but now a lot of people never even knew what that was? Kids especially, they get an iPad when they're 2, helicopter parents, and self-identified gender before they ever see a wrench or know what one is used for. Self-autonomy they know, personal responsibility they don't. Meritocracy is no longer promoted nor admired in youth; the opposite in fact, an atmosphere of “inclusiveness” that borders on Marxist “from those according to their ability, to those according to their needs” ideology. They certainly don't want the difficulty and stress of starting their own business, in fact they don't want to work at all, but instead go on a new kind of Welfare where rather than it being charity, it's a Right, called Basic Income. How can productivity possible keep up with consumption when everyone is “doing something meaningful.” There's a theory that all successful societies eventually reach this point of narcissistic hedonism, and collapse under their own weight, or are conquered by their hungrier neighbors, but it's probably going to be something else. The “decline,” if indeed there is one, isn't the many who are faltering, it's the concentration of power and wealth by the few.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-08_512_decline_of_america.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-08_512_decline_of_america.mp3 2:49 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash American Dream, America's decline, politics, humor no Sun, 02 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review some of the concepts about the next generation: The deal between older generations and the ones coming up has been broken. Modern narcissism really became apparent when generations started naming themselves. All generations dismiss the next generation out of envy. The generation that grew up with Facebook is reminiscent of historical constant contact between family & friends. Millennials can be excused for resenting being exploited & ignored. Rising education costs are the new indentured servitude. New graduates at least have each other because there sure isn't anybody else who cares. Millennials are Socialists because that's the best deal for them. The Occupy Movement was unsuccessful because... How could it be? You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_511_generational_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_511_generational_concepts.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash generation, Millennials, humor, politics no Sat, 01 Dec 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Probably only Millennial-written history books will remember the Occupy Movement. It was an arch-typical Millennial attempt at protest, essentially ineffective, in fact, more of a condemnation of Millennials than a promotion of their cause, because there wasn't a cause, not a clear one anyway; Occupy people were simply bored and anxious and demonstrating is easy, plus they got to do a little camping but still go home to a flush toilet. It was also self-defeating because of its foundation in anarchy, which has the terminal problem of lack of leadership; it's only self-appointed spokesman were unimpressive Marxist thinkers.  It’s hard for Conservatives to see past the resentment, envy, and perversity of the Occupiers to the real issue: unchecked exploitation of the Capitalist system by the Nouveau Aristocracy. Conservatives don't seem to understand that every year that goes by where Occupiers can't start careers or families, increases their ranks. The Occupy Movement may be dead but the reasons behind it continue unabated, and it won't flounder forever, eventually people will emerge who were articulate, credible, and can state their case clearly; in fact, it already happened when socialism became mainstream.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-06_510_occupy_movement.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-06_510_occupy_movement.mp3 2:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Occupy, Occupy Movement, Socialism, humor, politics no Thu, 29 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Socialism is attractive to unambitious people or when opportunity is concentrated. Millennials are becoming socialists because the Nouveau Aristocracy, supported by Republicans, have a lock on opportunity. The entrenched winners won't allow anybody else into the game so all that those out-of-luck people have left is socialism or revolution. Life is good so revolution is out as an option, which leaves more-n-more socialism coming our way as a means to redistribute opportunity. It's a travesty that socialist countries actually give their average citizen a greater chance of changing their status in society than the average citizen here in Liberty America. Indoctrinating students in public schools with socialist ideals has also played a big role in creating an environment sympathetic to socialism; the idea of world citizenship, environmentalism, stressing inclusion over individual achievement, and other globalist propaganda. Patriotism used to be a counter against socialism but that was another age. Also in the past, the Cold War made socialism taboo for previous generations; Millennials were the first generation that grew up after the fall of the Soviet Union. They are the generation of 9-11, endless war, The Financial Crisis, and The 1%. To a Millennial, spreading around the wealth seems like a reasonable idea.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-06_509_millennials_are_socialists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-06_509_millennials_are_socialists.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, Millennials, humor, politics no Tue, 27 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy No accomplishment has lost more real value than a college education. For all the high-minded talk about expanding your intellectual and emotional horizons, it's really turned into nothing more than preschool for joblessness. New graduates recognize in their hearts when it seeps in a couple weeks before graduation, that they have nothing lined up except as future baristas, some facial hair, and maybe a new tattoo? Even worse, many potential employers know this, and consider student loan debt an indication of poor judgment. The real secret of new graduates getting jobs is to be born into the Top 1%: jobs are about Who You Know, and Uncle Billy only cares about the degree as an excuse to why he's promoting you over the guys who've been with him for twenty years. Ivy League schools give prestige, but a degree from anywhere else just makes people wonder why you moved so far away from your parents then move back home afterwards. For the lucky few that get jobs, the initial excitement on the first day is quickly replaced by a sinking feeling when they show you your desk. After the first week, the despair really sets in, but remarkably, you adapt. Camaraderie with other new hires gradually replaces ambition and imagination with capitulation and complacency. However, the older people at the company stay clear because there's actually nothing more pitiful to old graduates than new graduates.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-04_508_new_graduates.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-04_508_new_graduates.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash New Graduates, humor, politics no Sun, 25 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The cost of a college diploma has skyrocketed because it violates the free market system. America's universities have always been a hotbed of gate-keeping, rent-seeking, self-interested job security & pretentious pandering, but in the current crisis, the problem can be traced to government intervention, specifically, the government student loan guarantee policy, because students wouldn't be able to get the unbankruptable loans for worthless, fashionable degrees without this bizarre incentive. The political machinations used to obtain this boondoggle appeal to both the education business industry and socialist mentality, so there is no one arguing against it, and the unnatural demand creates an artificial shortage of brick-n-mortar didactic teaching institutions. This has also led to degree inflation: jobs that used to require a Bachelors degree or lower now require at least a Masters, and jobs that never required a degree before, now do. The government student loan guarantee program fails because it distorts the adversarial relationship required for Markets to function properly. Students, who by definition don't yet have wisdom, are agreeing to lifelong servitude in exchange for exaggerated promises of success and misleading career advice, and the education industry exploits the opportunity via increased tenure and other ridiculous devices, like the ban on reporting graduate's employment and salaries, that can't be pressured by market forces, so they continue to fester. The sooner America moves to alternate forms of learning, such as on-line self-paced, the better.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-04_507_rising_education_costs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-04_507_rising_education_costs.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Rising Education Costs, education, student loan program, student loan, politics, humor no Fri, 23 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Modern medicine, diet, relatively easy lives, and the fact that most modern jobs are inconsequential, requiring almost no effort to perform, means Baby-Boomers aren't retiring. Plus, “Free” Trade moves the difficult jobs, such as manufacturing, that employers had to pay more for, off-shore. Farming, which at least provided opportunities to work, is now performed by machines or Illegal Immigrants. The consequence is that there are not enough careers to go around; Millennials can only sniff around the scraps of the Baby-Boomers, or become coffee baristas. But it's worse than that; because of the bizarre regressive nature of America's social programs, the burden is felt most heavily by Millennials. Taxes are taken from the first dollar of their meager paychecks and given to people who are relatively better off, and remember Obamacare required Millennials to buy health insurance when they didn't want it so everyone else could get a better deal. Millennials are also bearing the brunt of the ridiculous student loans, decades of internecine war, the stigma of imaginary racism, and they grew up being constantly scared by the false specter of an environment that will soon collapse. Married Millennials are taxed more, and the cost of raising children has gone up considerably from regulations, such as car seat requirements and childcare. Parents can now go to jail if they discipline their children. Fathers face onerous child support obligations, and there's even negative pressure from Neo-Eco and anti-White forces that discourage having children. Underlying all of this, the very fabric of American beliefs, such as national pride and patriotism, are challenged and denigrated by people who would benefit from the toppling of the status quo. No careers, no families, no safety, no underlying ideology; the Millennials could easily pass from this earth unnoticed by history.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-02_506_exploiting_millennials.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-02_506_exploiting_millennials.mp3 2:59 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Exploiting Millennials, Millennials, humor, politics no Wed, 21 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There is an aspect of younger generations that changes the world: they spend a lot of time in front of screens, and their phone is their trusted friend and babysitter. They “social network” every single day, every hour, sometimes every minute. This has had a profound, observable result, the most obvious being that so many sedentary hours leads to obesity and social awkwardness for some, but also a new confidence for most; they are definitely more worldly and sophisticated than their parents were at that age; mature in some ways beyond their years, yet lacking in ability to take care of everyday conscientious things, like servicing their car or doing home repairs. But constant contact with friends and family members actually seems like a return to more primitive times, and it's unclear if it's less or more psychologically healthy. There is also another odd aberration: look around you in any public venue; half the people are occupied on their phones but none are talking. They communicate through fragments of thought, and instantaneous gratification. This can't help but change how people think, in a way that would seem alien to someone from a century ago; it's truly an evolutionary step. Can you imagine if the social network went down?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-02_505_facebook_generation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-02_505_facebook_generation.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Facebook generation, social networking, humor, politics no Mon, 19 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Doubting new generations is not unique in history; it's almost an obligation to diagnose generations coming after your own. The impulse to judge is overwhelming, to repeat the negative refrains of every past generation for the succeeding one, the implication being that the world will end under new management, but there are clear changes and differences that are now occurring. For example, younger generations have little concept of loyalty to American-make products; they have no comprehension of the connection between locally-made goods and where jobs come from. In a younger person’s eyes, American goods are shoddy, and foreign made brands are worth a premium price. Also, Intellectual Property rights for music, movies, and computer software are totally unrecognized, and even resented. The next generations feels neither guilt nor shame when they pirate/steal the work of others for there own entertainment and amusement. Unfortunately, because many in the next generation don’t have real jobs or careers, their long-term goals are vague with no specific plans to achieve them. There is a tendency not to make extended commitments, like marriage, but instead engage in a multitude of relationships without reflection or promise, further eroding any sense of personal responsibility. Their exploitation of leisure and lack of work ethic also invites consequences. There's some precedence that economies tumble every 3 generations, and that time is upon us. Funny thing is, that just may be the excitement, correction, and motivation the next generation needs.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-31_504_the_next_generation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-31_504_the_next_generation.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash next generation, humor, politics no Sat, 17 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Since the advent of Identity Politics, naming generations has become a thing. It started with the narcissistic Baby-Boomers wanting a special designation, but of course, now every age group wants to be special: Gen-X, Millennials, Gen-Y. The names have taken on an undercurrent of derision: resentment held by youth towards their elder generation because they suspect that conspicuous consumption financial success is a no longer possible versus the natural envy of the old for the young. There is also a kind of victimhood shopping that causes the generational definitions to shift around such that it's never quite clear who is deriding who. The designations have essentially been weaponized by people who want to self-identify what generation they are in rather than observe a common definition, like when they were born, and through the the power of this subjectivity, they have full reign to blame virtually anyone as belonging to the oppressor generation, or claim to be an oppressed generation. What makes this so dangerous is that once an entire generation has the excuse to fail because it's another generation's fault, they will.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-31_503_generations.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-31_503_generations.mp3 1:58 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash generation, humor, politics no Thu, 15 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Historically, societies battled for dominance; the strongest enriching themselves at the expense of the vanquished, and imposing their will by force. This is the story of human history: forever mired in violence, most advancement coming at the expense of conquest and looting, until the strong were conquered by stronger still. During the Enlightenment, philosophical thought and human intelligence forsake the crudeness of force for the subtlety of alliances; both sides would agree not to take from the other but to instead be trading partners. The people within the society became allies; they made an arrangement with one another: I'll leave you alone and follow your rules if you make my life better. That's the deal. This agreement only continues because people who live in a society are indoctrinated as children to maintain the status quo; the values they share are common only because there is a concerted effort by The State to make them so. Eventually, with this arrangement, nations became so strong that enrichment through external conflict no longer makes sense, however, the most important part of the deal is the one between generations. With no outside enemy, modern societies have turned to conflict within: younger generations view their predecessors with suspicion. The Deal seems to have been violated by giant State debts, unfunded Ponzi scheme social programs, and environmental exploitation. The Deal between nations has held strong but The Deal within nations is breaking down.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_502_breaking_the_deal.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_502_breaking_the_deal.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash the deal, politics, humor no Tue, 13 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Political Parties are rife with misinterpretation; let's review some of the concepts: Conservative values tend to maintain the status quo. It's never clear what modern “liberal” values are since, by definition, they're always changing. The only thing that really separates Republicans and Democrats is taxes. “Compromise” is usually a dirty word, but so is no compromise. Candidates don't read nor even know their Party's Platform. Naive candidates are a primary revenue source of the Parties. The competency of politicians is low because democracy is a popularity contest. Celebrity politicians have the advantage of not being beholden to the political power structure. Lobbyists are often a candidate's only sincere supporter. Unspent campaign contributions can be a nice retirement plan. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.     Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_501_political_party_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_501_political_party_concepts.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash political parties, candidates, politicians, politics, humor no Sun, 11 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The whole concept of campaign contributions is bizarre: the idea that people would give money to other people, most likely in a doomed attempted to gain public office, has no valid explanation outside of ego-driven delusion. How does it even work? It's got to be because people are conditioned to give to charity, and tithing to their church, or have political aspirations of their own someday and so imagine the contribution to be a kind of quid pro quo. Considering that many of these same people are adamantly against taxation and the irony couldn't be more blatant. Also, since campaign contribution amounts are capped, the result is that relatively poor people end up funding relatively rich people. Even more unsettling is the fact that candidates, successful or unsuccessful, get to keep the donated money, either outright or as payment for being a candidate. The rules surrounding excess campaign cash vary by State but all can be skirted through how they are accounted for, but in some cases there are no restrictions at all. In Virginia, for example, politicians are not prohibited from using funds for personal expenses, such as vacations, houses, and cars. Recently, New York and Washington State lawmakers have been accused of spending campaign funds on lavish personal purchases. Surly, many candidates just wait until the smoke has cleared then retire on their campaign donation nest egg. Whatever people say they got into politics for, there's no getting past the get-rich-scheme aspect of the job.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_500_c_aign_contributions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-09-04_500_c_aign_contributions.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash campaign contributions, politics, humor no Fri, 09 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The idea that a single private individual could walk into the office of a public official, talk to them for a short time, maybe buy lunch, and that official will then vote in a manner beneficial to the lunch-buyer should be more astounding to all of us than it is. What explains the success of lobbyists? How is everyone so susceptible to bribes and flattery? Ego is the #1 motivating factor for people running for political office. Everybody wants recognition and admiration, and politics seems like the easiest way to obtain them since any Joe Blow can get elected – just look at our current politicians. Suppose you actually go through with it and become a candidate but you know nothing about running a campaign: the situation is surreal, your life is turned upside down, and there's nothing more soul-crushing on this planet than begging your friends for money. You're totally out of your depth, and afraid you are coming across to everyone as clueless. Then, after you're totally stressed out, a ray of hope appears: your first lobbyist. The Lobbyist is nice, and they know things about you and say you're a great candidate. They mention they've just met with members of congress you've only seen on TV. This lobbyist is the closest you've ever be to the power structure, and they say they want to help, and offer a few bucks. You melt. It's actually amazing how little they offer, but it's finally the reverse of begging, and you appreciate getting some unasked for support; it finally feels like you thought it would feel. The Lobbyist never really asks for anything, they just treat you right, and you pay attention to them because you're so grateful, and the magic happens.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-27_499_lobbyists.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-27_499_lobbyists.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash lobbyists, lobbyist, humor, politics no Wed, 07 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy We started as a country of part-time politicians who wouldn't risk their precious personal and business reputations by lying or taking bribes in politics. They were incorruptible because they were already secure in their lives. Today's career politicians are so pathetic because they are without principles, totally creatures of the people who pay for them. The vast majority of these grasping aspirants have never risen to anything beyond mediocre getting-by, and will do anything to be someone. Small, Special Interest groups have recognized this fatal weakness of representative democracy, and have successfully leveraged it to present compromised candidates. It only takes a few people to block a competent candidate and put their own gasbag on the ticket. Voters can't tell: they read a 1-paragraph blurb in the Voter's pamphlet, and vote based on appearance. Most voters don't know who to vote for because they've never heard of anybody so any known candidate will win, especially a celebrity. A celebrity breaks through the Special Interest stranglehold because celebrities have Followers, and get press. What's good about this is that a celebrity owes no allegiance to the gatekeeping worms, and can't be corrupted by money or fame because they already have it. Whatever celebrity kookiness we have to deal with, it's not going to be backroom deals for personal gain. Get ready to lead Kid Rock, Kanye, and Oprah.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-27_498_celebrity_politicians.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-27_498_celebrity_politicians.mp3 2:04 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash celebrity politicians, celebrity candidates, politics, humor no Mon, 05 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Should politics be a popularity contest? When someone "represents the people," do they really need to be liked? Should their fashion sense, age, and speaking powers be a determination of whether they're qualified? Reading about Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, and many of the other Founding Fathers; few of the early pioneers of pluralistic politics could be elected today; they just weren't cool enough. How it got this way is glaringly apparent but nobody actually consciously admits it: people get into politics to be famous, and even though they mewl about “wanting to help people,” that's only a cover phrase because admitting to being ambitious is considered gauche. Everyone would run for political office if they could do it anonymously, that's why the idea of an election lottery is so appealing. The reason the quality of candidates is so low is that conscientious people have some misgivings that they are competent to be making decisions for everyone. It takes a truly experienced & confident individual, or a totally clueless one, to actually run for office. On the one hand, there are successful people whose achievements were earned without help of physical appearance or social facility; but on the other, attractive people are often unaware that the accolades they receive are primarily a result of someone wanting to sleep with them.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-18_497_popularity_contest.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-18_497_popularity_contest.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Popularity Contest, political candidate, politics, humor no Sat, 03 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let me give you an idea of what being a candidate is like: first, it's not about you, it's about the Party. The Party has a big payroll, and you are their customer because The Party gets its money from your campaign. You don't know that at first, you think they're happy to get you because you are a good candidate and they think you have something to contribute. Wrong; they're happy to get you because you have your savings, your parent's savings, and lots of friends to beg for money. The Party then charges your campaign for their "help:" research, an office, a campaign manager, lots of line item stuff you're not quite sure how it will help but they assure you it will. They call you often to stress that you have to raise money, they provide you with 1000s of names to call, a number to call from, and they'll really pressure you for a start date. You and all the other candidates are basically a telemarketer business. Losing candidates rarely run again because they're embarrassed; they've finally realized they were the fish in a high stakes poker game, and they owe their disappointed family, whose love they exploited to get money, an apology; plus, the adulation they imagined they'd receive as a candidate; their friends flocking to help, people stopping them on the streets, newspapers printing articles, never happened. Frankly, the post-defeat time can be devastating to a person's self-esteem. The reason that successful politicians are professionals who have never done anything else is because the people attracted to the lifestyle; the glad-handing, disingenuousness, and narcissism; is what it takes to win office.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-18_496_naive_candidates.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-18_496_naive_candidates.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Naive Candidates, politics, humor no Thu, 01 Nov 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Since all ideologies have to fit into only 2 Parties, determining which one most closely matches you is difficult, especially when you don't know your ideology yourself. Mostly people default to the Party of their parents but for those seeking their own place, how would they know? Supposedly, a Party is defined by its platform though few people read it. The platform is created every 2 years at the State level and every 4 years nationally to coincide with presidential elections. It's the focus of much activity and bustle that ultimately leads to nothing because most of the candidates don't read it either. However, there are some hints: unions are clearly called for in the Democratic platform, while tax reduction features prominently in the Republican one. Not surprisingly, both major Party's platforms are closer to The Center than they are to what most people imagine the Parties are; there is no wild-eyed Collectivist rantings in the Democratic platform and even Identity Politics is only alluded to. Similarly, the Republican platform has none of the selfish rantings of Libertarianism, even though those groups are the loudest voices on Social Media. In fact, both platforms have admirable goals, and either would serve as a foundation of goals for the country, if anybody actually followed them.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-16_495_party_platform.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-16_495_party_platform.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash party platform, humor, politics no Tue, 30 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Many big “C” Conservatives express a No Compromise attitude. They imagine the other side doesn't compromise, and all the ground they've lost in the Cultural War is because they have been weak in their resistance, bending to accommodate the needs and desires of other people rather than insisting things stay the same. Libertarian thought similarly does not recognize that other people in society are your allies, and must be negotiated with. This is why Conservatives and Libertarians are so negative towards government, because only it has the power to force compliance, not recognizing the irony that government is all that keeps a minority status quo safe from the disaffected masses. Conservatives are not the only No Compromisers, plenty exist on the Far Left too, people for who the status quo holds absolutely no allure. The Far Left insists everyone is “equal” and if not so then must be forced into compliance, no compromise. The Left also wants to limit what people say, even what they think; how can there be any compromise if there can't even be a discussion about it? So the two extremes, those who want absolutely no change, and those who want to kick over the apple cart, have at least one thing in common: they compromised on not compromising.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-16_494_no_compromise.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-16_494_no_compromise.mp3 2:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash compromise, humor, politics no Sun, 28 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There are only 2 Parties so everyone has to squeeze their political values into one or the other no matter how awkward the fit, but how do they know which is the closest? Usually, a person joins the Party their parents belonged to then fumble around trying to describe what values they believe in. The Party Platforms also provide some guidance for determining values but almost no one reads the Platform, or even knows what's in it. There's also the fact that the Parties switched what they stood for a couple times. Whichever Party is in power, especially if it's for a long time, becomes understandably vested in the status quo; even bad ideas have momentum. The other Party, trying to regain power, takes the other side of the bad ideas to gin up votes, even if their stance is counter to what it was a few decades ago. Republicans equate values to morals, which is usually based in religion. Right now, but not for the first time, the Democratic Party is increasingly dominated by Collectivists, whose primary value is that the needs of the group supersede the wants of any individual, and there's a lot of Collectivism in the New Testament, which is why most Democrats argue they also represent moral values. Libertarians are shoehorned into the Republican Party, so anyone from that substantial camp is anti-government, while Democrats see government as a positive. Mostly people use their base self-interest to distinguish the two Parties, and it comes down to one issue: taxes; Democrats for because they primarily receive the benefits, Republicans against because they primarily pay them. Other values, like abortion and guns, are secondary.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-14_493_republican_vs_democrat_values.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-14_493_republican_vs_democrat_values.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash republican, democrat, values, politics, humor no Fri, 26 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberalism, as pertains to the nation’s founding, was the idea of democratic representation, no Class system, debt forgiveness, Rule of Law, and personal autonomy, but over the decades it has come to mean less adherence to the status quo, often explained as “new ideas,” but mostly old ideas presented to a young audience who hasn't encountered them before. However, there are some traits that can generally be implied about liberalism: trust in government, universal enfranchisement, wealth redistribution, and social integration. After that, it's a potpourri of ideologies that don't necessarily fit together but have no place else to go in a nation that has only 2 Parties. Back-in-the-day, when African Americans were still trying to vote, and young people were breaking out of the traditional religious molds of their parents, “liberal” became equated in many conservative people's minds with hippies, feminists, and the Black Panthers. That disdain continues to this day, though Millennials playing videogames has little connection with anything “groovy.” Today capital “L” Liberal is a small Centrist sliver of the Democratic Party, where most of the rest of Democrats have otherwise adopted a Collectivist ideology of one sort or another, and though they still believe in personal liberty, it's a kind without the component of personal responsibility, an entirely narcissistic version of liberty that capital “L” Liberals find abhorrent.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-14_492_what_are_liberal_values.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-14_492_what_are_liberal_values.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberal, liberals, values, politics, humor no Wed, 24 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The confusion with calling someone conservative is that you don't know if it's a little “c” or big “C” because everyone is conservative. We all want our lives to mostly stay the same with some minor changes here and there, it’s just that the part of the political spectrum that is called big “C” Conservatives are more married to to the status quo, usually because their comfort level has already been met. That's why older and wealthier people are big “C” Conservative, but there are some other defining factors that are more than just self-interest that can be included in the Conservative pantheon of ideals: patriotism, Nationalism, Religion, and a deep distrust of government. That last comes because government and God are the only powers that can change the status quo, and big “C” Conservatives are on God's side. Other defining factors of Conservatives is their fundamental belief that life is a meritocracy, and people deserve what they get, even if it isn't logical, which is explained by “God's will,” which leads to an aristocracy through wealth concentration, but God must have wanted it that way. Conservatives, of course, are attached to their customs & traditions, which leads to a social aloofness and separatism, which is why Conservatives aren't enamored to pure democracy that often leads to social mixing, as well as some very unconservative changes. Because small “c” conservative actions usually result in sustainable policies, big “C” Conservatism is logical and rational, though not innovative or flexible.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-12_491_what_are_conservative_values.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-12_491_what_are_conservative_values.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash conservative, conservatives, humor, politics no Mon, 22 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Democracy has lots of concepts; let's review those we've covered: Collectivists consider the will of the electorate to be the national majority rather than the local Representative's constituency. The Electoral College envisioned a group of autonomous States, not a monolithic national plebiscite. The math of voting is almost immaterial because the dynamics of voting is emotional. The Right to Vote is a pragmatic one. GOTV campaigns are intentional biased. Enfranchisement was what men took in exchange for surrendering their Right of Violence. Every Special Interest group has a different list of requirements for disenfranchising people they disagree with. Republics stave off the tyranny of the majority implicit in pure democracy. Parliaments better represents all the various ideologies. Top 2 Primary voting has the possibility of functioning like a parliament. Concentration of wealth & power eventually leads to oligarchy & autocracy. Commissions mask who is responsible. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-12_490_democracy_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-12_490_democracy_concepts.mp3 2:58 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash democracy, humor, politics no Sat, 20 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Perhaps the worst form of government is by committee. The problem is that councils and board appointments have vague accountability, especially if they're tenured. Also, often there's some kind of commission that must vote on an action, or worse, a group with legislative authority but no ability to decide anything, like Freeholders. It's unclear where responsibility lies behind the semi-anonymous faces; even elected committee members are only a little more identifiable and responsibility still cannot be determined by regular people, certainly not your average non-partisan voter. Compounding this is some unelected and unknown City Manager who does whatever they want and no one is the wiser nor can do anything about. This plays out at the local level as mayor vs. city councils, both against the City Manager; school superintendent vs. school boards; advisory panels, civic project boards, and interstate committees. Their power is absolute but so diffuse that overcoming momentum is virtually impossible, and after all the deliberations, commissions are little more than a rubber stamp for decisions already made by behind-the-scene elites. Often this is intentional subterfuge, and how legacy bureaucracies get such power; manifesting in the “Deep State.”   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-12_489_commissions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-12_489_commissions.mp3 2:10 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash commission, city council, school superintendent, school board, humor, politics no Thu, 18 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Oligarchies are an organized minority exploiting the unorganized majority. They maintain their power through their relationships with each other, and have the power to benefit themselves at the expense of everyone else. They gain control of a nation, usually through aristocracy, but corporations and other Special Interests can create a democratically elected oligarchy, like in the U.S. A benign oligarchy does have “a rising tide raises all boats” aspect to it so as they become more rich and successful, their inventions and success benefit society as well, but as the oligarchy coalesces power, it becomes virtually impossible for an average person to enter the elite group. Obviously, oligarchies increase income inequality, and siphon off a nation's wealth, leading to a plutocracy, which is an oligarchy whose members are rich. An autocracy is a form of government where one single individual has supreme authority. It's well known that autocracy improves efficiency; it's less well known that it also is a bulwark against the insidious corruption of oligarchies. Any society will eventually become an oligarchy because insightful people learn how to subtly manipulate the levers of power; the more complicated, the more invisible the influence, but an autocracy seems a poor alternative. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be another?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-10_488_oligarchy_vs_autocracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-10_488_oligarchy_vs_autocracy.mp3 2:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Oligarchy, Autocracy, humor, politics no Tue, 16 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In the U.S., there are only 2 Parties yet there are dozens of identifiable ideologies. To have any impact at all, voters have to fit their ideology into one of the 2 Parties then fight for a place at a crowded table. The new Top 2 Primaries, where the top 2 vote-getters advance to the General election regardless of Party, first begun in Washington State then California, are an opportunity to better represent all the people, not just simple majorities that can be easily manipulated. The most obvious change that Top 2 voting gives is that in highly partisan voting areas, where one of the Parties has no chance, they could select a viable candidate that was less odious to them, thereby still having some control. For example, of the 2 Democrats for Republicans to choose from, one is a more acceptable moderate, rather than only someone from the Far Left. Also, with the advent of Top 2 Primaries, parliamentary-like representation is possible. This is because Top 2 places the most granular elected position, the Precinct Committee Organizer, or PCO, on the ballot, and anybody can run, no Party affiliation required. PCOs are elected from the people who live in a small local area; one from each Party, so there are hundreds of them. PCO elections allow any ideology in if they have enough local support and can organize, so electing PCOs is like electing a parliament, and since they're selected by voter's ballot rather than in the backroom of Party politics, Communists, Fascists & Greens have just as much chance as anyone else if there's a large enough constituency in their neighborhood, and they meet monthly to represent their constituents. It's republic-style democracy with a parliament flavor.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-10_487_top_2_parliament.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-10_487_top_2_parliament.mp3 2:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Top 2, Parliament, humor, politics no Sun, 14 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy America was the first liberal democracy with its primitive 2-Party system where winner-takes-all. In more modern, parliamentary democracies, fractional vote-getters have fractional representation, so a Third party that got 10% of the vote would have 10% of the representatives. Not so here; all that a Third Party could be here is a spoiler: just ask Bush Sr. what he thinks of Ross Perot. Parliaments have the great advantage of ideological choice: voters have a smorgasbord of political platforms to choose from, a much more inclusive solution. The weakness and the strength of parliamentary representation is that some combination of the various factions must form an agreement among themselves to work together, hopefully one of which will represent the wishes of the vast majority of people. If not, the coalition dissolves and another one forms. Some nations, such as Italy, are so fragmented that coalitions fall almost every year, but at least fringe thinkers are not left unrepresented, and though their numbers may be small, there is always the opportunity to be part of a new coalition where their influence is amplified. Everyone needs the hope that their desires will be represented eventually. This is, of course, opposite of the United States congress where one Party can steamroll the other, totally ignoring their desires, which is essentially frustrating the desires of half the country's people.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-08_486_parliamentary.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-08_486_parliamentary.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Parliamentary, Parliament, politics, humor no Fri, 12 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy If a liberty-based society is going to use democracy for governing, only representative democracy, a republic, will work to get anything close to objective leadership because pure democracy, at its best, is a crude tool wielded by the uninformed & hapless. Luckily, statistically, more often than not someone who is informed and competent gets elected, and this representative percolates the desires of their constituency onto a larger stage. However, pure democracy, tyranny of the majority, is more attractive to Collectivists who criticize the idea of servicing parochial desires as it detracts from what is “best for everyone.” The Left either does not understand the concept of a republic or wishes to subvert it. The Collectivist mindset dictates that local representatives should bend to the national will rather than champion what is in the best interest of their region. In fact, a trend is forming for states to assign their Electoral votes based on national voting patterns rather than the actual votes of their residents. The local mores and values of local people are of no concern to the rest of the nation; especially not to city dwellers who can imagine a future where everyone is equal, mass transit, zoning regulations, and Kumbaya. But America is not a democracy and never has been; it's a republic, which means that regions elect representatives who are their surrogates. Unfortunately, the selection process can be systematically, and relatively easily, gamed, so we ended up with something which is not quite a republic or a democracy.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-08_485_republics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-08_485_republics.mp3 2:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash republic, republics, politics, humor no Wed, 10 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The argument that only select people can vote has always been percolating, usually with regards to military service, but with the advent of so many Illegal Aliens who vote primarily for the Party that caters to them, the idea of universal enfranchisement is again under attack. There is even a senseless discussion about whether democracy is even a good idea, and that at least we should disenfranchise the unqualified. The real discussion, one that is almost totally subjective, is who is “unqualified”? In the imaginary world where anything that pops into our heads counts as a reason to prevent others from voting, first, no retards; if your IQ under 100, get outta line. Next, no mental illness; if you take any psychs, you're gone. Next, get rid of old people; the advent of Old Age naturally makes someone more self-centered and less self-aware; if you're over 70, die already. The reality is; with a society as large and diverse as ours, there can be no voting requirement besides agency, because in truth, there are more important ways to determine if members of society are beneficial: will they die in battle, perform mind-numbing labor, and raise another generation of the same.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-06_484_disenfranchisement.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-06_484_disenfranchisement.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash disenfranchisement, enfranchisement, humor, politics no Mon, 08 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In early America, voting was limited to an elite cadre of property-owning men. It was thought that others need not vote because, using a Libertarian economic metaphor, a rising tide lifts all boats. Democracy was new then and when these men got together to form Liberty Nation America, they voluntarily surrendered to The State the one thing all men have, their Right to Violence. This worked out when it was men voting because they had all sacrificed something, and got something back: the strongest did not rule so the rest of us could land on the moon and live into Old Age. Unfortunately, a new religion was simultaneously born, the concept of Natural Rights, imbued by a magical force that superseded the Right to Violence. Inevitably this led to the Right to Vote for everybody, including people whose violence was inconsequential, women, who never-the-less, were enfranchised. Through democracy, these women who had not ceded anything, exploited The State's monopoly on violence for their own benefit. Other powerless groups with little capacity for violence saw the success women have had in subverting State Violence to their own ends, have begun using the same democratic tactics. Now the tables have completely turned: men, having surrendered their power of violence, are now at its mercy. Men have been thoroughly cucked by democracy, and it's unlikely anyone will ever land on the moon again.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-06_483_enfranchisement.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-06_483_enfranchisement.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Enfranchisement, humor, politics no Sat, 06 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There are certainly enough voters in any election to be an accurate statistical representation of the population's desires, even if for only that instant in time. Statistically speaking, adding 10 or 10,000 people to the roles of voters will not change the election's outcome; that is, unless the new voters are not selected randomly. That's where Party-driven GOTV campaigns come in: it's implicit that when a political Party engages in GOTV, it's trying to get an unrepresentative sample of the population to force their special issues through. It's curious that so many of these GOTV campaigners do not recognize the irony of their subterfuge: they exploit democracy in the name of democracy. In GOTVers minds, everyone thinks like them, but just need to participate. Activists are so wrapped up in the sanctimony of their ideals that they can't imagine that anyone can think any differently, except evil people, of course. They think the evil people somehow got too many voters and a GOTV campaign will bring in right-thinking people to balance things out. If the GOTVers indeed canvased the general public then their efforts would be admirable, but they don't, they target people whom share similar values, trying to weigh voting in their favor. Thank goodness the numbers are so large and their efforts are so pitiful, because GOTV never seems to have any effect.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-05_482_gotv.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-05_482_gotv.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash GOTV, get out the vote, politics, humor no Thu, 04 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Democracy is the selection method most suited to liberty because you make your own decisions and your vote is worth the same as anyone else's. This seems obvious but what's controversial is that democracy shouldn't require citizenship; everyone who's affected by a decision must be in on it to get a quorum. For example, a bunch of people in an auditorium deciding on whether to turn the heat up or down doesn't depend on the citizenship of the people in the auditorium, just that they are the ones affected by it. Everyone in that auditorium needs to have their voices heard if peace is to be maintained; no ID card or special requirements takes precedence over pent up physical violence. Even with complete enfranchisement, if 51% thought it was too cold in the auditorium, the other 49% would still be unhappy, but placated, unless one of the major weakness of voting is employed: bribery. Everyone has a price; sweltering heat would be unanimous at the right price, but only 51% actually need to be bribed. If you're not one of the people who were bribed, you must suffer the heat with no recompense. This failure of democracy is further exacerbated when only a subset of the people can vote; then the 51% could literally be 1 person, the only citizen. Which is the peaceful scenario: a non-citizen voting with the awareness of everyone around them, or the worm who doesn't care what happens to anyone else as long as they get theirs? And what about the situation where people outside the auditorium are voting? The only way voting works to solve the violence problem is once someone is inside the auditorium, they're just as important as anyone else.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-05_481_voting_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-05_481_voting_rights.mp3 2:42 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash voting rights, vote, humor, politics no Tue, 02 Oct 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Voters don't know anything: they don't know what district they're in; they don't know who's running; they don't know what the issues are or even which side they're really on. Even the Voter's pamphlet has no impact; what it really comes down to is which candidate can attract the most Special Interest groups. A candidate can ride a single issue to election, like abortion, it doesn't matter what else they do or say, so on all other issues, how much more random can it be than that? But voting is psychological; even when people don't actually physically vote, they vote in their imaginations, which is why voting still has tremendous value as the glue that holds society together. It's not bread and circuses the keeps the populace placated, it's voting; constant voting, at least every two years. Any longer than that and the tenuous logical connection between voting and control dissipates, sowing the seeds of discontent and revolution. However, the intent of voting, which is to steer the course of history, doesn't really make any difference in the candidates or laws. How could they? No one can predict the future, certainly not the statistical incongruities of 100 million people.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-01_480_voter_dynamics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-01_480_voter_dynamics.mp3 1:58 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Voter Dynamics, politics, humor no Sun, 30 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Many small States joined the Union only reluctantly because they didn't want to become the coattails of more powerful voting blocks. People vote instead of revolting, but mathematically votes mean nothing, which leaves the psychological effect of voting, the tribal aspect, millions of years of evolutionary my-team-versus-your-team rivalry that binds groups together. Democracy for large groups was suspect and still is but people will trust in someone they consider local to put their interests first. That's why they want representatives that can punch over their weight, to try and get their issues and concerns heard in a noisy room. A pure democracy, where a few big cities decide what everyone is going to do, shatter that illusion of even minimal control, that's why people expect their State to be recognized individually in the House and Senate, and why there's an Electoral College for the presidential election. If there was no Electoral College, presidential candidates would only need to campaign in the big cities, or just California for that matter, and many States would simply be ignored altogether. People vote their best interests, and it's easy to predict that the interests of 8 million people in a big urban center have entirely different interests than the whole populations of 6 or 7 States. States don't even recognize doctors, lawyers, accountants & engineers from other States, let alone a huge block of votes from strangers in NYC. If there wasn't an Electoral College, we would require something that did the same thing to maintain our tribal sensibilities.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-01_479_the_electoral_college.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-07-01_479_the_electoral_college.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash electoral college, politics, humor no Fri, 28 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Democracy definitely has its downside; mob rule is a real problem. As an antidote, we're told we have a Republic, one person representing many, rather than a democracy, but the pro-democracy people have an alternative story that the original choice as a republic was on purely practical grounds because it was too difficult to get a large number of people to vote over long distances, which is now antiquated and we have to get closer to pure democracy. The reason for the competing narratives is that people who are out of power come up with alternate explanations of things that are prohibiting their ascendance to power. People who want a pure democracy think it will lead to the benefit of the majority, and people who support a republic think that individual Rights, as envisioned in the Constitution, are at risk to pure democracy. This dichotomy manifests itself in another way; the collectivist, pure democracy types, think representatives are not responsible to the people who elected them, but should instead represent the thinking of the majority. There's even disagreement with the concept politicians are responsible for executing the will of the electorate at all, but should instead represent what is “good for everybody,” as decided by them in their elite status. However, it's not in a politician’s purview to substitute their own judgment when the will of their constituency is clear. People who applaud “taking a brave stance” against the will of the electorate are simply those whose own selfish interests agree with that politician.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-29_478_will_of_the_electorate.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-29_478_will_of_the_electorate.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash will of the electorate, pure democracy, democracy, humor, politics no Wed, 26 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy What are Rights? What aren't? Let's review: In the hierarchy of Rights, liberty comes first. The only Natural right is the Right of Violence. So-called “Positive” Rights require the government to act, while traditional “Negative” Rights prevent it from doing so. “Freedom” is the most misused word in the world. Freedom of Association is under dire attack by the concept of “inclusiveness.” How was it ever okay to force people to join a union? A Welfare society will certainly never land on the moon. Being homeless is a social construct, and as such, any solution will be a political one. It's pretty clear the Constitution changed in the past but it seems to have atrophied now. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-29_477_rights_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-29_477_rights_concepts.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash rights, humor, politics no Mon, 24 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Many religious people think the Constitution is in the same mystical pantheon as the Bible; that every word is unblemished truth, not to be interpreted by mere mortals; and a lot of Conservatives get close to that reverence. In reality, the Constitution is unoriginal material written by deeply flawed men; the time, place, and ingredients were simply right for it to happen. Most folks get their Constitutional scholarship from what they remember in 8th grade civics, and bloviating know-it-alls on TV. In reality, the Constitution has become an arcane fable whose interpretation is mostly through precedence; nobody is deciding what the words mean anymore, but rather what other people thought the words meant in the past. Earlier in the Constitution's 200 year history, lots of things changed, which only deepens today's perplexity, because considering its evolution, it's clear that the Constitution was indeed “living” at one point, though it's not now, and may even have stopped changing forever? The last time there was a real Amendment was in 1971, almost 50 years ago, and no new Amendments seem likely. Actually, the Constitution has become a lot like the Bible because its thoughts have been solidified, and there's no further expansion for modern times. Unfortunately, for those who want to upset the status quo, this state of Constitutional affairs is going to have to bend or something's going to break.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-29_476_living_constitution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-29_476_living_constitution.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash living constitution, constitution, politics, humor no Sat, 22 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The word “homeless” is a modern construction: it means people living in such a way that it makes other people uncomfortable. Peoples all over the world once lived in animal-hide tents, giant dormitories, and rough log construction with dirt floors where everyplace was a toilet. Obviously, anyplace can be a home; it doesn't even take much getting used to because routine itself provides the sense of “home.” The choice to live in a tent on the sidewalk in the downtown of a vibrant city rather than in a ramshackle house in Nowhere, Montana, is one lots of intelligent people make. The most insidious moral peril is that posed by those who want to provide homes to the homeless because that it incentives more of the same. There's always the people just on the other side of the cut-off point that see the advantage in being taken care of, and so limit their own volition. They are instead motivated to fit whatever requirements are needed to reduce stress, and being homeless is a small price to pay if the option is a daily grind of mind-numbing work and insecurity. Combine that with an ideal of personal autonomy that has no penalties for irresponsibility, and homelessness is not a aberration, it's the expected state of affairs.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-27_475_homeless.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-27_475_homeless.mp3 2:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash homeless, humor, politics no Thu, 20 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Even though half the U.S. population depends on some form of government assistance, we are not yet considered a Welfare society because the Top Quarter of our population are relatively free to pursue their own goals, make their own decisions, and reap the rewards of their actions. But how much of a burden can the High Achievers bear before the incentives are no longer worth the effort? We have historical examples of Communist regimes that seem to indicate it takes about three generations before cracks start to show. By the time the grandkids come along with no expectation of achievement or even self-motivation, what was once considered a sign of society's transcendence, its guarantee of social welfare, becomes its downfall. The countries of Western Europe have been dealing with mass welfare for decades, since right after WWII, for obvious reasons, but the consequences even now are not so glaringly apparent that the majority of their populations would revert back to American levels of insecurity, even though there are occasional attempts to reign in the excesses. Especially now, with the mass influx of immigrants from other nations, primarily Muslims, the stress on Western European welfare systems is tremendous. Germany was able to integrate East Germany, so they have confidence they can do so repeatedly. France, Greece, Great Britain & Italy, have all grappled with this problem; their failures should be warnings to us, and their successes should be examples. What must be kept in mind is that welfare should not be so attractive that joining in becomes the actual goal.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-27_474_welfare_society.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-27_474_welfare_society.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash welfare, welfare society, society, humor, politics no Tue, 18 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In direct violation to our Freedom of Association, the National Labor Relations Act forces employees to join unions under collective bargaining agreements. It's amazing the conflict took so long to go to the U.S. Supreme Court, probably because the Freedom of Association is a derived Right, not specifically mentioned in the The Constitution even though past Supreme Court decisions have determined it exists. At the State level, 26 States have already made that determination in their State Supreme Courts, and the Freedom of Association has been upheld, but in 24 States, until the Supreme Court's recent decision in Janus, you had to join a union or lose your job. Under pressure from unions, Washington State and California passed responding legislation giving unions an advantage. Union advocates claim that non-members are free-riders because they receive the benefits of the union's strong negotiating power without paying dues, and that may be true but preventing free-ridership should never supersede a Constitutional Right. Adding impetus to the forced union membership conundrum, people look at the power of the Nouveau Aristocracy and how it controls our lives, then suggest alternatives, like joining unions, that control our lives just as much: the answer is NOT to give away more liberty, it's to take BACK the liberty that's gotten away.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-25_473_forced_union_membership.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-25_473_forced_union_membership.mp3 2:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash NLRA, freedom of association, politics, humor no Sun, 16 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Technically, The Constitution does not specifically mention a Right of Association; it's derived from the First Amendment which gives people the Right to Assemble which led the Supreme Court to declare “people can engage in effective speech only when they join with others,” and means that people can demonstrate, form clubs or unions, and meet with other people without government interference. It also means people do NOT have to do these things; for example, people cannot be forced to join a political Party. Unfortunately, under the guise of "inclusiveness," the Freedom of Association is under serious threat. It used to be who you associate with was up to you to decide, no one could force membership into your organization, or who you must work and socialize with, but inclusiveness reverses that power. The Inclusivity People, in conjunction with the Equality People, have taken control of the narrative; imagine how difficult it would be to argue that we need divisiveness, a demarcation between "us" and "them," but how else can you protect the things you cherish if you are forced into sharing? How can you enjoy life to the maximum if you cannot escape those you do not like. It's clearly collectivism, even Marxist, but the penalties for objecting to inclusiveness have become legal, and because of the discourtesy and verbal assaults, no one fights back against these infringements on our Freedom of Association, so we have essentially lost it. Right to Privacy and Freedom of Movement are similarly under threat.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-25_472_freedom_of_association.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-25_472_freedom_of_association.mp3 2:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Freedom of Association, politics, humor no Fri, 14 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Is there any word more misused in the world than “freedom”? People imagine freedom makes them godlike, able to do anything they want with no restrictions. In fact, it's the nature of any restrictions that defines what people consider “free.” In collectivist nations, you are “free” when someone else is providing your food and housing. In Libertarian think, you are “free” when you can horde opportunity. In religions, you are “free” when everyone is acting like God says. All these definitions are putting quite a burden on freedom to deliver, to the point where people consider anything they want as freedom, and any restrictions as a lack thereof. Freedom is important because it's one of the two components of liberty, the other being opportunity. Opportunity without freedom is worthless: there is plenty of opportunity in old Communist regimes but without the freedom of individuals to act, they stagnated and atrophied. In the Jeffersonian liberty sense, freedom is defined judicially; you are allowed to do anything unless explicitly forbidden by law. But to collectivists freedom is about socio-ecomonic desires: people would be more free if they were relieved of their burdens. From the globalist viewpoint, where everyone is “equal” and bounty is to be shared, the U.S. doesn't rank very highly in “freedom,” however, our definition of freedom allows everyone to have their own point of view.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-23_471_freedom.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-23_471_freedom.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash freedom, politics, humor no Wed, 12 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Civilization comes when men capitulate their Right of Violence, either because tyranny forces them down, or they voluntarily submit to The State because it's in their best interests, as was the case at the founding of America, when because of our capacity to imagine, we surrendered our Right of Violence to The State for our families, and for the opportunity to land on the moon. However, men gave up this ultimate but erratic power with the understanding that it would not then be used against them, so the Founders put restraints on The State, called The Bill of Rights, which are “negative” Rights because they specifically identify where The State cannot intervene: speech, guns, privacy, discrimination, you know the list, then for unresolved issues, we chose democracy. Democracy empowers everyone but it brings consequences; once weaklings got a taste for power through democracy, they immediately recognized the utility of State Violence, and decided they wanted to use it to obtain things for themselves. Thus was born the concept of a “positive” Right, where State Violence is used to coerce people into the designs of an elite who condescendingly determine what is best for everyone. Positive Rights are given enigmatic titles like “human rights,” “natural rights,” “socio-economic rights,” “dignity rights;” and are considered international, making men everywhere responsible for their neighbor nations, a kind of global collectivism. Positive Rights are the exact opposite of what the founders of liberty intended, but instead are what they feared.     Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-23_470_negative_vs_positive_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-23_470_negative_vs_positive_rights.mp3 2:41 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash negative rights, positive rights, humor, politics no Mon, 10 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Back when men decided things with clubs, it was clear to everyone that the only natural born Right was violence. For millennia that was the case, the most violent dominated, but tribes that inherited altruism, the caring for others, where able to break the cycle of violence, and society advanced. A tacit deal was made: safety and improved living standards in exchange for men's voluntary sacrifice of personal violence. However, altruism has a poor memory, as time passed and civilization no longer had a daily reminder of the violent potential of men; sophistry became the norm, and people forgot where power comes from; that all other Rights are only possible if the Right of Violence is properly recognized. Violence is the only way to keep a society intact; men's voluntary submission to State Violence in exchange for The Deal. Most people, even men, no longer understand that; they take it for granted that everybody else will remain nonviolent even when it's against their best interests, and now that women, minorities and weirdos have a taste of power, they want to wield State Violence for their own aims, with no realization from where that violence emanates. These people arrogantly think that police and soldiers are theirs to command; to take liberty through surrogate violence if need be; to get what they want by force. That only works until men reassume their Right of Violence.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-21_469_right_of_violence.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-21_469_right_of_violence.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash rights, violence, humor, politics no Sat, 08 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy What comes first: the Right to Life or Right to Liberty? The famous testimony “give me liberty or give me death” makes a stark choice. Constitutionally, liberty comes first, however, people argue this incessantly; in cases of safety, in the case of guns, and certainly in the case of abortion. What about the choice of life versus property or privacy? It seems that life comes before them. And how do other Rights fair in the hierarchy? Our Freedom of Association and Freedom of Travel are far down the totem pole. “Inclusiveness” isn't even a Right yet it takes precedence over who we can exclude from our presence, and ever-more-prevalent tolls and other fees are limiting travel. Social rights take precedence over religious rights; there's a baker in Oregon can assure you of that. It's also tough to talk about Rights because everybody thinks whatever Right they are invoking takes precedence over all others. This becomes especially problematic when the “right” they are claiming isn't recognized in U.S. jurisprudence, nor specified in The Constitution; things like Natural Rights or Human rights. It's probably the fault of the American education system that people can't tell Rights from philosophy or personal value systems. These people insist that State Violence be utilized to force their interpretation of Rights on everyone. The only paramount Right seems to be that of procreation; no one can be forced to use contraceptives, no matter their proven incompetence of being parent.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-21_468_hierarchy_of_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-21_468_hierarchy_of_rights.mp3 2:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash rights, hierarchy, politics, humor no Thu, 06 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy How do The Courts work in America, let's review: The concept of justice has been hijacked for social and moral ends rather than an issue clearly defined in law. Prison serves almost no purpose but vengeance but how much is vengeance worth? Prisoners paying for their own incarceration is eerily reminiscent of Debtor's Prisons. Public perception of police has made a dramatic shift since the advent of cell phone videos. Militarization subtly affects attitudes of police who begin to view themselves at war with their communities. Electing judges inevitably leads to court bias, but society already has bias built in when it comes to female privilege. Sharia Law in America is little different from Jewish Law but it ignites more fear and concern. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-19_467_court_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-19_467_court_concepts.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash courts, humor, politics no Tue, 04 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The 1924 Federal Arbitration Act allowed litigants to resolve cases using the forum and law of their choice, called Alternative Dispute Resolution. It's the idea that people can mutually agree to resolve their civil disputes in accordance with any set of rules which both agree. What makes this powerful is that the successful claimant can then use State Violence for enforcement. Via this mechanism, Jewish law has been practiced in the U.S. judiciary for decades, by rabbinical courts, The Beth Din of America, which serves Jews as a forum for arbitrating disputes through the din torah process; obtaining Jewish divorces, and resolving financial disputes. In fact, U.S. Courts will compel using the Rabbinic Court if it is designated in an arbitration provision of a contract.   Similarly, in the U.S., judges have to consider Islamic law, called Sharia law, in their decisions if it is written into a contract, or both parties to the dispute agree. For example, a judge may have to recognize the validity of an Islamic marriage contract from a Muslim country in order to grant a divorce in America. However, recently six states have passed laws to prohibit judges from considering “foreign laws” in their decisions, called “ALAC,” American Laws for American Courts. These bills have been stalled by the Muslim Brotherhood which accuses the bills' sponsors and supporters of Islamophobia, campaigns against them, and sues in court. Islamic courts are becoming common in North America, and for many Muslims, Shariah is divine and cannot be changed, but the U.S. interpretation of Islamic jurisprudence is called “fiqh,” and it can be changed. In a landmark 2010 New Jersey case, a judge refused to give a wife a protective order after her husband repeatedly beat and raped her, the judge saying he had to defer to Shariah law. Luckily, the decision was overturned by an appellate court.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-19_466_sharia_law_in_america.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-19_466_sharia_law_in_america.mp3 3:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Sharia law, politics, humor no Sun, 02 Sep 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy One of the myths in America is that everyone is equal under the law. That's a bedrock belief, and maintaining its veneer is incredibly important; attorneys can actually have their license revoked for publicly speculating that particular judges are biased in some manner, but most people are aware of the situation anyway. For example, there's how women are treated with a double standard in the realm of domestic violence, child custody, and underage sex. These topics are almost impossible to discuss because mentioning female privilege is taboo in Political Correctnessland, but you can predict how an elected male prosecutor will react to a young Blond White female who is slugged in the face by a Black Male college football player, no matter what the provocation. Electing judges exacerbates Court bias. The argument for electing is that The People get to select who judges them, but that immediately inserts a political factor, and politics is about one faction over another, whereas judges must at least be perceived as even-handed. Unfortunately, the entire fabric of the jurisprudence system unravels if it is advancing the agenda of a Special Interest group. In Washington State, that would be the public unions, the Teacher's Union in particular. That's why the Washington State Supreme Court is not trusted by the Republican Party; how can half the population hold its highest judiciary suspect?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-19_465_court_bias.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-19_465_court_bias.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Court Bias no Fri, 31 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Police are not soldiers: they shouldn't look like soldiers, they shouldn't talk like soldiers, and they certainly shouldn't do the jobs of soldiers. Unfortunately, the body armor, video helmets, and automatic weapons police are now utilizing are eerily reminiscent of American soldiers in the Middle East. The militarization of police became visible on television to the public in the late 1960s with the use of tear gas against rioters. Then in the late 1990s, unused military equipment was donated to local law enforcement agencies under the “1033 program.” Studies showed that police forces that received military equipment had more violence regardless of local crime rates, and the new militarization is also associated with intelligence gathering of political activists. This has continually escalated to the ridiculous level it is now; for example, in 2014, the Los Angeles Unified School District agreed to return three grenade launchers but it would keep its armored personnel carrier and 61 assault rifles. The very presence of military equipment can't help but change the attitude of the police themselves. Take a controlling personality who already has a proclivity towards physicality, and give them a testosterone-inducing ex-military vehicle, and the results are predictable. Even if the most conscientious individuals are recruited, the simple optics of an armored, overwhelming behemoth that drives down city streets along with Priuses and Cadillacs isn't worth it. The implication is that they are at war with their communities rather than keeping the public safe.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-17_464_militarized_police.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-17_464_militarized_police.mp3 2:41 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash militarized police, police, humor, politics no Wed, 29 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The mythos of police in America has taken a beating in recent years but they still remain in the admirable pantheon of firemen, athletes and astronauts. In fact, those people who become policemen because they decided to as children are exactly who a society wants as policemen. Police work requires a high level of egalitarianism; treat everyone the same, don't pre-judge. That's a high bar; most folks don't have it in them, and unfortunately, there's a significant number of policemen that do it for the power trip and the gun. Luckily, the screening that police cadets face weeds out the worst psychological basket-cases but most police work is dull and routine, and puts them in contact with the worst elements of society, so whatever a young police academy graduate started out as, by the time they are veterans on the force, most are jaded beyond recognition. There's also a growing divide between the opinions of the public and those of police officers: over 80% of police say the public doesn't under the the risks-rewards of police work, but the people view it exactly opposite. Also, in the past, Hollywood dramatized police in an overwhelmingly positive light but Pop culture is evolving due to dashcams and smartphones which has led to the police themselves wearing body cameras, as a defense against claims of malfeasance; the implication being that police would act dishonestly without the constant and intimate oversight. It doesn't help any that police have now become indistinguishable from military soldiers, no longer the friendly neighborhood watchman of Sesame Street.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-17_463_police.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-17_463_police.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash police, politics, humor no Mon, 27 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The United States locks up too many people, it's as simple as that. Not only is this a reflection of our society but it costs a lot of money. Some scheming misanthropes see this problem and come up with the draconian solution of making prisoners pay for their own incarceration. This may sound appealing on the surface, maybe even logical, but just examine the natural consequences for a moment: what if the prisoner, as usual, has no money? How is money going to be squeezed out of the prisoner? A loan? Extort their family? There seem to be few viable options; is it a coincidence that the use of Chain Gangs is a making a reemergence in the penal system? It's not too difficult to see where the combination is going... The new slavery. It gets even worse because private companies are given State Power to collect State fines, and incarceration is the penalty for not paying. Before a prisoner incarcerated in this manner can get out after their term to declare their Constitutional Right of bankruptcy, they're found guilty of not paying at a pre-release hearing, and thrown back in prison where taxpayers continue to pay for their incarceration, providing an endless source of labor for The State. Explaining all this with the worst possible motive is probably the correct one: it's intended to keep people in jail indefinitely, both as a source of cheap labor and to keep them off the streets. Society should never raise money through punishment, as it inevitably leads to exploitation and abuse.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-15_462_prisoners_paying_for_their_own_incarceration.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-15_462_prisoners_paying_for_their_own_incarceration.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Prisoners Paying For Their Own Incarceration, humor, politics no Sat, 25 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The bottom 10% of society have IQs so low that they are incompetent at everything. Add in the developmental psychopaths, and the number of dangerous men who live among us is absolutely frightening. And now that we've become more civilized, there is no place for them to go. Most people who vote obviously don't know this because their sense of propriety is completely suburban; they have little or no association with real life. When confronted with the news of wrongdoing, they wallow in self-righteous indignation, casting judgment from the safety of gated communities: for them prison is vengeance and conveniently keeps the riff-raff out of their neighborhoods. Unfortunately, imprisoning people in mass does nothing but improve traffic congestion. Prison has almost no curative value, but it does offer food, shelter, security, friends; things that many of the prisoners don't have outside prison, and many people who are incarcerated simply can't survive in our complicated society. In fact, the regiment and security of prison may be just the thing to give them purpose in life, and really, how much different is prison from the military? There's no question the military turns boys into men, as does prison, just not the kind of men you want to know, or that society benefits by.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-15_461_prison.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-15_461_prison.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash prison, humor, politics no Thu, 23 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The distortion of the word “justice” to legitimize any hair-brained ideology that comes along is a relatively new phenomenon. Everyone wants justice, they're just not quite sure what it means? We just assume when justice is served, it was something logical. It's not a coincidence that this is also the term most closely associated with our existing legal system, and justice has a legal definition which should have made it objective, but because one of its synonyms is “fairness,” it has become one of the most subjective of words: what's fair to one person is another's tyranny. More synonyms for justice are “righteousness,” “equitableness,” and “moral,” all highly subjective. Unfortunately, there's no mention of truth or rationality. It's no wonder that scheming Special Interests groups exploit the positive preconceptions and lack of objectivity of justice, trying to advance their causes to the top of the synonym hierarchy. For example, how did racism or bigotry become the most important presumed Constitutional prohibitions, at least as viewed by Social Media, whereas real Constitutional Rights like Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Association, Freedom from Search and Seizure, and the Right to Bear Arms are under attack. There's a deep irony that Social Justice Warriors are the ones trying to take everyone else's justice.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-13_460_justice.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-13_460_justice.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash justice, politics, humor no Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Nothing has as much impact on our lives as The Law, let's review the legal concepts we've covered: Every new law must overwhelming justify its negative impact on liberty. Most laws should automatically terminate once their specific objective is met, or some future date, whichever comes first. There is a delicate balance between those who exploit the anarchy of lawlessness and a Police State. Fines that go to the finer are little more than a Protection Racket, or soon will be. Zoning is the practice of political ideology wrapped in reasonable sounding arguments. Asset seizures violate the 4th Amendment but law enforcement agencies don't care because they are the beneficiaries. Squatter's Rights may be the solution to vast private accumulations of property. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-11_459_legal_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-11_459_legal_concepts.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash legal concepts, adverse possession, zoning, police state, politics, humor no Sun, 19 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy What about the situation where billionaires buy up huge tracts of land, millions of acres, and turn it into their own private natural reserve? Ted Turner owns 2 million fenced off acres, containing his 14 ranches and 4 girlfriends he visits on a rotating schedule. In fact, of the 2.3 billion acres of land in the United States, government owns 37%, Indian reservations are 3%, leaving 60% to private landowners, of which the top 10 private landowners together own almost 15 million acres, and The Nature Conservancy has tied up another 21 million acres. Considering The West was settled by offering a family “40 acres and a mule,” there's no longer any reason to raise mules. Adverse Possession is the legal principle that a person can gain legal title to land simply by occupying it for some amount of time; so-called “squatter's rights.” The concept descends from Roman law that allowed someone who was in possession of land to become the lawful proprietor if the original owner did not evict them in two years, and it was held as traditional English Common law after that. In the U.S., the length of time varies State by State, anywhere from 5 to 40 years. Of course, it doesn't work against The State because “no time runs against the king,” nullum tempus occurrit regi. The Utilitarian philosophy that the most efficient ownership of goods goes to the maximum utility seems to rely on who's defining what the “maximum utility” is. If a squatter stakes out a little homestead on some Playboy's private savanna, that seems like a high utility, to the homesteader anyway, but the Playboy may want to build another ranch there, making room for a couple more girlfriends. I'm thinking Adverse Possession and Playboy billionaires are going to come to loggerheads in the future. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-11_458_adverse_possession.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-11_458_adverse_possession.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash adverse possession, humor, politics no Fri, 17 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Asset seizure and civil forfeiture allows The State to confiscate anything associated with a crime without a conviction or even charges brought. Police officers can simply take whatever they deem involved: cash, automobiles, your parent's house; then the PROPERTY must prove itself innocent before it's returned. This is a total violation of the 4th Amendment, which specifically disallows unwarranted seizure, but it seems completely vulnerable to greedy police departments and government agencies that want the cash for themselves. Of course, terrorism, or the Drug War before that, were used as stalking horses to justify such outrageous behavior, but like all extremities that violate the Constitution, once the camel's nose got under the tent, everyone's Right becomes compromised. Just property seized by the Department of Justice exceeds $2.4 billion annually, and that doesn't count what is seized by Treasury. The private property is then sold at public auction, and the money retained by the agencies doing the confiscating. You know you've gone too far towards a Police State when Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas objects; quote “This system where police can seize property with limited judicial oversight and retain it for their own use has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses.” We as a people have let one of our Rights atrophy by not challenging this ridiculous new police power, so the blame is ultimately on us, but the fact that no elected officials have risked their career to publicly resist the police tells us a lot about what kind of people run this country.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-11_457_asset_seizures.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-11_457_asset_seizures.mp3 2:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash asset seizure, civil forfeiture, politics, humor no Wed, 15 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Nothing identifies the ideology of a government like zoning; the desires of central planners making selfish decisions for questionable public good. Zoning is the idea that it's against the law to do something with your own property unless it's specifically allowed, the exact opposite of Rule of Law. Look at the restrictions put on land use and you can determine what kind of people live there: high rise living started out as poor tenements but now it's something many people prefer. Local shopping, flower boxes and bike lanes are anachronistic nostalgia, but do appeal to a segment of the overall population who move there, people who denigrate private homes as “McMansions,” and demonize mowing the grass. The same people responsible for homelessness and forcing people from their cars. Zoning regulations didn't show up in the U.S. until 1916 in New York City due to buildings blocking sunshine, and it hasn't gotten any better since then. After Oregon went overboard on zoning, property owners went to court, and now if zoning devalues property, government must pay the difference, but it turns out there were more complainers than plaintiffs, and Oregon hardly ever has to pony up because it doesn't have any money. However, the Godzilla of all zoning is self-imposed: HOA rules that regulate the color of your roof, and whether your garage door can be open during the day.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-13_456_zoning.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-13_456_zoning.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash zoning, politics, humor no Mon, 13 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It's never a good idea to financially incentivize those responsible for our protection: it soon becomes a protection racket. Policing is not a business or we could hire private police; same with Safety Inspectors and other government functionaries we allow to monitor and regulate us via the public sphere because we can't trust private interests not to exploit us. However, government, especially local governments, can be just as insidious an extortion threat with their use of fines. Fines should never be used as revenue generators for local government because if the benefits accrue directly to the agency imposing the fines, that's self-dealing. For example, it's unproven rather Red-light cameras improve safety, or are a deterrent, but even if that is the assumption then any safety law that has a fine attached to it is suspect unless the fine money goes to an uninterested Third Party and there is no financial benefit to the ticket-giver. Enriching private out-of-State companies who provide the cameras and ticketing, and that are then given the State's power of collection, is especially heinous and should be explicitly prohibited. In fact, many States have made Red-light cameras illegal and some State Supreme Courts have even declared them unconstitutional. Why is that precedence not universal unless, of course, local governments want a slush fund.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-09_455_red-light_cameras.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-09_455_red-light_cameras.mp3 2:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash red light camera, fines, humor, politics no Sat, 11 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The foundation of modern democratic States is Rule of Law, which is the legal principle that someone cannot be punished for doing something that is not prohibited by law; in Latin “Nulla poena sine lege,” “no penalty without a law,” because like most things legal, it was codified into Roman Law. However, law is not treated the same from one nation to the next; in fact, in legal circles, a humorous sophism has emerged: In England, "everything which is not forbidden is allowed;" in Germany, "everything which is not allowed is forbidden;" in France, "everything is allowed even if it is forbidden;" and Russia where "everything is forbidden, even that which is expressly allowed;” while in North Korea, "everything that is not forbidden is compulsory." Truth underlies that stereotype because laws are either reflections of societies or societies are reflections of laws, it's difficult to say; people have to want to abide by laws for them to work. Unfortunately, scofflaws undermine all laws, and a law that is not enforced makes it difficult to enforce all laws. There is a delicate balance by those who would like to prohibit things for their own selfish reasons versus those who would exploit the freedom of no supervision for their own selfish reasons; let it swing too far one way and anarchy results, and too far the other and America ends up as a punch line in a limerick.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-09_454_not_prohibited_is_legal.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-09_454_not_prohibited_is_legal.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash rule of law, politics, humor no Thu, 09 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The winds of politics often change direction, and the Must Have law of the previous administration becomes the albatross on the next. A simple solution is to add a Sunset provision into laws so that they expire after a certain goal is achieved or at most a time limit is reached, perhaps after a decade or so, unless further legislative action is taken for extension. Marque examples include the Patriot Act which was renewed, and the Assault Weapons Ban which was allowed to expire. The first philosophical reference to a sunset provision of laws dates back to Plato, and they were a mandate of Roman law. Societies through the millennia have recognized the need to minimize the number of laws, not let them multiply into incomprehensible obscurity like they do today. Similar to explicitly written Sunset clauses, there is also implied termination of laws, called “desuetude;” a word unfamiliar to most Americans but not uncommon throughout the world. It's a legal doctrine that causes laws to become unenforceable by a long habit of non-enforcement or lapse of time; basically an automatic repeal of inactive or obsolete laws. Canada and Australia actually inserted desuetude into their constitutions, and it had some popularity in U.S. last century when about half of the States adopted it. However, at the federal level, the political tactic has been to wrap all budget items, which expire every year, into a giant “omnibus” bill then only allow a single yea or nay vote on everything all together, which defeats the whole intent of a Sunset.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-07_453_law_sunset_clause.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-07_453_law_sunset_clause.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sunset clause, politics, humor no Tue, 07 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review some of the concepts about the next generation: The deal between older generations and the ones coming up has been broken. Modern narcissism really became apparent when generations started naming themselves. All generations dismiss the next generation out of envy. The generation that grew up with Facebook is reminiscent of historical constant contact between family & friends. Millennials can be excused for resenting being exploited & ignored. Rising education costs are the new indentured servitude. New graduates at least have each other because there sure isn't anybody else who cares. Millennials are Socialists because that's the best deal for them. The Occupy Movement was unsuccessful because... How could it be? You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.     Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-06_511_generational_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-08-06_511_generational_concepts.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash generation, Millennials, humor, politics no Mon, 06 Aug 2018 07:29:16 -0700 Politics & Philosophy How do you know when a new law or regulation is needed? It’s not enough that they simply “save lives;” any new law or regulation must be treated like the judicial system treats someone accused of a crime: improper without overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The burden-of-proof is to justify a new law or regulation is needed versus individual liberty; the less the law affects people, the less justification is needed, but if a new law or regulation crosses into people's liberty then that law is going to require extraordinary supporting arguments. “Gun Control” falls into the New-Laws-Need-Review category: it’s not enough to say people can’t have guns just because others don't want them to, or some “safety” issue; proposers must clearly identify why a new gun control law is more important than individual liberty then provide substantial evidence that the law will achieve that goal. This applies to adding new government agencies; there must be evidence that the use of tax dollars has an overwhelming benefit that justifies impinging on the liberty of everybody. Most voters don't like new laws: it seems that a good political tactic for an elected official would be to proudly proclaim how many potential new laws they thwarted. They could run on stopping laws rather than creating them. Special Interest groups would be angry but a majority of voters who would keep them in office.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-07_452_new_laws.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-07_452_new_laws.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash laws, politics, humor no Sun, 05 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The whole idea of gender is currently under redefinition, let's recap: Women do not realize that respect from men comes from competition within the dominance hierarchy. Women do not choose to participate in the sciences because they have better options. The LOWV are an anachronistic organization that is more hypocrisy than substance. Gender is how someone is viewed by society, not how you view yourself. Transgender bathrooms are the ultimate example of the minority dictating to the majority. Children can't drink, can't smoke, can't vote; how can they possibly know if they're transgender? Unfortunately for people who consider themselves transracial, no one else does. Other people must get permission to impinge on your liberty, not demand you accommodate them by insisting “How does it affect you?” “Man-Spreading” is one of the more laugh-worthy fronts in the war on men. Females are often not held accountable for their complicity in violence against men. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-05_451_gender_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-05_451_gender_concepts.mp3 2:55 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash gender, politics, humor no Fri, 03 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Men are indoctrinated against striking women, and if they do, society treats them extremely harshly. Men also strike men, but the punishment has no trace of outrage, and leaves no stigma. These attitudes are left over from the age of The Patriarchy when women had special treatment in the eyes of society as recompense for the ascendancy of men. However, modern women, in their quest for “equality,” conveniently bypass such anachronistic dichotomies. Most people actually defend the double-standard; the wall of sanctimony is virtually insurmountable because women want to retain the remnant benefits of The Patriarchy, giving lie to their stated agenda: Feminists are not looking for equality, they are battling for superiority. Women also hide behind erroneous statistics that women will experience more physical violence in their lifetime than men. Are all these statisticians women who have never experienced male-on-male hierarchy conflict that all males are subject to but don't report? Women often claim verbal abuse as well, which can be twisted into a Domestic Abuse, which is a crime, but statistics show that men are much more the target of verbal abuse than women. However, focusing on the incidents where a woman physically assaults a man is by far the worst inequity: women can strike men, triggering a testosterone-based response that gets the man arrested while the woman achieves victim status. For example, a Florida college quarterback got kneed in the groin after trying to prevent further escalation of a conflict with a drunk woman, hit her, then lost his scholarship. Nothing happened to the woman. Women blithely enter the realm of male hierarchy oblivious to the seething violence all around them, relying on the indoctrination of men to keep them safe, yet males suffer the consequences of their action. Who's the real victim here?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-05_450_female_violence.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-05_450_female_violence.mp3 3:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash female violence, equality, humor, politics no Wed, 01 Aug 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The best way to win a war is to always stay on the offensive, and a multi-front offensive is the best kind, especially against an opponent who isn't even aware they are in a battle. “Man-spreading,” the ludicrous claim that men sit on subway benches with their knees apart rather than together to accommodate tighter packed riders, is an example of keeping the opposition on the defensive by giving moral license to any sanctimonious twit to confront the man-spreader verbally and harass them, yet the hypocrisy of women putting bags on the seat next to them is a common phenomenon. There's man-shaming on multiple fronts; for example, “mansplaining,” where women mock a man who talks to them like a teacher, as ironic as that sounds. Feminist women complain that they don't want the air of superiority men take towards women, so-called “talking over” them; that women know just as much as men do. This is a narrow, self-centered accusation, intended only to demean men. Men “mansplain” to other men too, especially if it's a manly subject like repairing cars and the listener is a effete Volvo driver. The anti-man campaign doesn't have to make sense because that's not its intention; its goal is to diminish men by haranguing and disparaging them, one of the most effective weapons in the secret war against men.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-05_449_man-spreading.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-05_449_man-spreading.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash man-spreading, man-splaining, humor, politics no Mon, 30 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There is a subtle aspect to collectivist thinking that liberty-practicing people find surprising: the "how does it affect you?" accusation. This question puts the liberty-seeker on the defensive to explain their reasoning for objecting to the actions of someone else, because liberty people are accustomed to the person impinging upon their liberty to provide justification, not the other way around. When you are in a public place, you do not expect to be forced into acting contrary to established norms: you may find it uncomfortable to address a man as a woman or meet a woman in the Men's bathroom. The Prayer-in-School and Pledge-of-Allegiance crowd use the same tactic: “Why can't you stand silently while everyone else pledges? How does it affect you?” Of course, liberty is the answer to both situations; with liberty, you recognize the wishes of others out of courtesy, not obligation, and you may withdraw your acquiescence at any time. Control-seekers attempt to reverse responsibility of who must capitulate in a social conflict; they express the opinion that what someone else wants subsumes your preferences if it is more important to them then it is to you. If you object, the first time you are confronted, even accused, with the retort, “How does it affect you?” you freeze because you haven't had time to think it through. This is because you're acting and responding out of ingrained social courtesy, with the expectation that people will be courteous back. You don't have to explain yourself because your liberty is paramount; if others want to impinge upon it then they must provide the justification. It's up to them to get your permission, not your duty to accommodate them. Other people are simply allies, not friends or partners, and allies don't make unilateral decisions without violating the implied social treaty.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-03_448_how_does_it_affect_you.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-03_448_how_does_it_affect_you.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash transgender, liberty, pledge, humor, politics no Sat, 28 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The opposite of “objectifying,” which is what feminists claim men do to the female body, is “subjectifying,” which is how Identity Politics mongers gain control over others. If you can claim any gender and the accompanying paradigm that entails, disregarding biology, then you can go so far as to claim a race and heritage that conflicts with the facts. The famous example of the affluent White woman who claimed she's Black is not an isolated case; transracialism is also a thing. Unfortunately for her, Black people didn't see it that way, and as in the case of transgenders, other women and men don't see it that way either, but that makes no difference to the Identify Politics mongers; they have taken subjectivity to its logical conclusion, that there are no facts and there is no truth. Once everything is subjective, the natural conclusion is no limits on definitions, which is why the list of claimed genders has grown into the 100s, and now people not only expect to chose their racial and sexual identity, they also want to be “fluid” about it, choosing another identity as they deem necessary. When people can expect to slip out of social identification by claiming they are the only ones who can decide; their control over human interaction becomes absolute, which is why the strategy is gaining acceptance. You can demand to wrestle on the women's team even though you have male muscles, and claim hiring preferences even though your past is one of affluence. When there are no social constructs, there is no way to know how to interact in a social situation, established values have no meaning, and debate is confused because there are no basic accepted facts, making communication among people who don't agree virtually impossible.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-03_447_transracial.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-03_447_transracial.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash transracial, transgender, politics, humor no Thu, 26 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Under the now acceptable umbrella of transgenderism, there are pre-teens saying they are the wrong sex and wanting treatment. How can a 10-year old child have the maturity to determine such a thing? 18-year olds aren't even allowed to drink but now children can change sex at age 15; paid for by The State?! There are powerful drugs used to delay puberty but the psychological tribulations of using them have got to be even more life-altering. The investigative show, Frontline, interviewed several of these so-called “transchildren,” 12-year olds recounting their feelings and experiences as transgenders. One male child demanded he be called by different Disney princess name every day. He may be diagnosed with gender dysmorphia but there's obviously a lot more going on, and his parents were indulging the child's fantasy. “Gender dysmorphia” is actually considered a mental illness in adults, and the unsophisticated things children say should not support that radical conclusion. There's other more plausible explanations than "I have a girl's brain in a boy's body." In the Frontline program, the gender transition doctors interviewed admitted that this is the first generation of transchildren and that the medical science is new. The darkest, most telling interview was with one of the first transchildren, now in his/her 20s that said he/she can't quite say they regret it but wishes he/she had waited for more maturity. If even one child who got a sex-change operation "regretted" it, that would be too many.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-01_446_child_transgender.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-01_446_child_transgender.mp3 2:42 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash transgender children, humor, politics no Tue, 24 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy For whatever reason, in America at least, people are very sensitive about exposing their bodily functions in public, especially to the opposite sex. Young people, still developing their maturity, are the most sensitive. For that reason we have sex-specific bathrooms. Bathrooms are gendered because society respected the wishes of its majority to be gendered. There were probably lots of people who didn't like the expense of building multiple facilities, but the courtesy of the majority won out. However, there is now a vocal and political minority pushing their ideology on the majority, allowing men into female bathrooms. They exploit the courtesy that got gendered bathrooms in the first place but without the democracy. It used to be that “gender” and biological “sex” were synonymous but now the term “gender” has become subjective: there are a relatively small number of penises out their claiming to belong to women, and visa versa. These malcontented people insist that their feelings take precedence over the majority of other people's feelings, and want to use urinals or bidets even though their plumbing doesn't fit. In a single person bathroom, no one would care but in the typical McDonald's-style multi-urinal, single stall layout, prepubescent girls and boys, and even overly-chaste traditionalists, can no longer be sure the other person looking through the crack in the door is the same sex. Another example of the feelings of the minority, and a small one at that, overriding the preferences and feelings of the majority.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-01_445_transgender_bathrooms.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-06-01_445_transgender_bathrooms.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash transgender bathroom, politics, humor no Sun, 22 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Sex is determined by reproductive plumbing, but gender is how a person fits in socially, and it's determined by a single biological molecule: testosterone. That's what makes the gender discussion so volatile, because people who want to be a particular gender can take chemicals to look and act like a man; simply shoot up with male levels of testosterone; and to be a woman, take drugs that block testosterone. Those drug-takers have a point when they say they are a gender that conflicts with their sex, and people's whose bodies metabolize testosterone differently may also feel they are in the wrong body, so-much-so that they have invasive operations to make them physically appear the sex their testosterone dictates. These people do NOT have a gender identity problem, they are demonstrably transsexual, which means they have transferred to at least the appearance of their gender-felt sex. Transgender people, on-the-other-hand, have NOT gone to that extreme, they still have all the biological traits of their birth sex, but they want to claim some other societal definition, for personal and inscrutable reasons. For the most part, what gender someone wants to claim to be is a liberty issue; they can choose to be whatever made-up fluid self-definition they want, but the trend is to infringe on other people's liberty by insisting by force of law that everyone address them as they want to be addressed. However, calling someone “Her Majesty” is voluntary in a liberty society; it's not up to the recipient to dictate what others think of them, that's a confusion that comes from aristocratic and Marxist thinking. Forcing someone else to do something is the very essence of power, and the true intent of the gender-mongers. The tactic of making something subjective, even your sex, is an obvious attempt at gaining the upper hand, especially when the violence of the State is so easily swayed by alliances of people who have not been successful competing via the status quo. By appealing to others with similar self-interests, and leveraging the innate altruism we all have, the gender-mongers have achieved success in controlling the narrative that would have been laughable only a generation ago. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-30_444_gender.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-30_444_gender.mp3 3:24 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash gender, transgender, transsexual, humor, politics no Fri, 20 Jul 2018 08:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The League of Women Voters is an anachronism that hopefully fades away with the last generation. They reminisce on past discrimination and claim it as their qualifying trait for membership in today's victimhood culture. In the political arena, they project power far in excess to their relevance, almost always to the detriment of male candidates. The LOWV gained its social credibility legitimately but that was long ago; any modern day illusions that women are left out of the political process is contrived to extend that justification long past applicability. Like all identity groups, what makes the LOWV despicable is that many of its members show loyalty to the number of X chromosomes rather than competence, confidence and conscientiousness. LOWV members will cross Party lines to vote for a female if the candidate of their own Party is male. Even if this trait doesn't apply to all LOWV, it's certainly a large enough share to turn a close election. Any organization with sex, race, or religion in its name is no longer proper for the public sphere, for the same exclusionary reasons that these same organizations ironically claim to pursue. There is no valid reason for trying to redress past wrongs; sons are not responsible for the sins of their fathers, and daughters do not inherit the victimhood of their grandmothers. Men, also rooted in the past, are under the false impression that women simply want parity, when what they really want is superiority. The LOWV argument, indeed the feminist goal, is basically that men have had it over women long enough, it's their turn now, it's only fair.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-30_443_lowv.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-30_443_lowv.mp3 2:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash LOWV, the league of Women Voters, politics, humor no Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Women dominate admission in Medical and Law School, and are fully two-thirds of the Post-Graduate programs, yet women Special Interests continue to harp on their supposed under-representation in the sciences, especially engineering. They point at the parity of men and women in international science degree programs and insinuate there's some kind of discrimination in American universities. The answer is simple: engineering is difficult, unglamorous and doesn't pay very well compared to medicine and law; plus, the men attracted to engineering are geeks, attaching a huge social stigma. Why wouldn't a women instead choose another field if they have those kinds of smarts? More money, more prestige and easier. It's no wonder engineering programs are under-enrolled; thank goodness boys make up their minds long before they go to college that they're going to be scientists & engineers. If women truly want girls to sacrifice better careers to become scientists & engineers, then they need to start indoctrinating them young. They should be taught to hang around the fringes of social acceptance in High School, don't date, remain clueless of trends and fashion. It's not that hard to mimic how the awkward, ungainly boy nerds do it: bring their lunch to school in a brown paper bag, talk incessantly about video games, remember arcane moments of old Star Trek episodes. There has been some success getting more women into science and engineering undergraduate programs but unfortunately, they mature and start making decisions for themselves for what's best for them, so keeping them in those programs is an even bigger challenge.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-28_442_women_in_the_sciences.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-28_442_women_in_the_sciences.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash women in science, sciences, humor, politics no Mon, 16 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Men are subliminal experts at respect: we are immersed in it since childhood, royally kick-started in puberty, and finely honed during our formative years. Respect is not friendship, respect is not admiration, respect is not fair. Men are always considering who's Alpha in any situation, and adjusting their behavior accordingly. There's a constant battle happening behind the scenes, allies and enemies, aggression and submission, all the time fighting for dominance; and men who lose the competition voluntarily subordinate themselves within the hierarchy. yet the entire game is played invisibly to women. Women claim respect they have not earned: they are protected as children by tattling; they are catered to by males seeking rut; they dream of being Disney princesses; and they are never fired in the crucible of 7th-Grade-Gym. Women are simply never participants in the cycle of brutality that form the social consciousness of men, which is where respect comes from. Women are unaware that they have low status, and can't understand why there aren't more of them at the top. They blame discrimination then insist on being inserted above men of far higher status. There are other kinds of respect: intellectual, beauty, wisdom; but the respect women are looking for can't be forced by State Violence.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-28_441_women__respect.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-28_441_women__respect.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash women respect, politics, humor no Sat, 14 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review some of the concepts we've discussed about The Right: The Right accepts that an aristocratic class will deservedly arise. Nationalists want to maintain their national values and culture despite what Globalists may think of them. The Enlightenment was that time in history when liberalism emerged; so that The People come before potentates. Libertarians are fatally blind to the fact that everyone else in society must also be content. Libertarian Socialism is a weasel word intended to devalue the obligation society owes the average person, as well as to hide the Collectivist grab for power. Totalitarianism is a constant danger from those who are certain their judgment is better than yours. The Left offers no liberty, and The Right concentrates liberty, so The Center would be where there is most liberty to most people. Libertyism is a made-up word that tries to carve out a domain for people who listen to this podcast. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-26_440_the_right_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-26_440_the_right_concepts.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash The Right, libertyist, Nationalism, politics, humor no Thu, 12 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy If you consider individual liberty, the right to make decisions for yourself and reap the rewards or suffer the consequence thereof, to be the defining issue of your ideology, and you're in The Center, believing the goal to be the most liberty to the most people; what are you going to call yourself? It seems like it should have the word “liberty” in it, and politics has the habit of attaching “ist” to the end of words to identity a person's ideology, so naturally “libertyist” comes to mind. That would make “libertyism” the stated goal of most liberty to most people. How does that sound: are you a Libertyist? It's possible that you're the only one who actually is in The Center, all others simply pretenders from the The Left or The Right who don't want to commit. If there are more erstwhile Libertyists, how will we be able to identify one-another? Where will you go to ask questions? How will you be able to organize and spread your ideology? After even cursory consideration, it's clear that starting a new political movement is going to be a lot of work; that's probably why there's only The Left and The Right. However, you can buy my book, “The Center,” from Amazon, visit my Facebook Page “Ask a Libertyist,” and continue to listen to these podcasts, so there is that...   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-26_439_libertyist.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-26_439_libertyist.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash libertyist, humor, politics no Tue, 10 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Commentators often talk about the mythical center in politics but it's never defined, and it's assumed that these people are the deciding factor in many elections where The Left and The Right are otherwise evenly matched. The center can be defined as several things: social center, economic center, ideological center; but often these undecided people have no clear agenda and simply vote for the candidate with the best bio in the Voter's Pamphlet. However, with respect to liberty, there is a clear way to define The Center. The unique attribute of America is individual liberty with The People as the beneficiaries, making decisions for themselves and reaping the rewards or suffering the consequences of their own actions. On a Left-to-Right liberty scale, the extreme Left has no liberty since the needs of the group are paramount, and on the extreme Right, only the aristocracy have liberty since liberty requires opportunity, which is usually related to wealth. So The Center would be where the most individual's rights come first, simply said: the most liberty to the most people. In fact, this is an easy measurement for any State action: does a new law or regulation increase most people's ability to make decisions for themselves or not? For example, protecting speech though at the expense of the liberty of the people who don't want you to say things that offend them, or redistributing opportunity would increase liberty among the population as a whole but at the expense of the liberty of those who take great pride in hoarding wealth.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-26_438_most_liberty_to_most_people.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-26_438_most_liberty_to_most_people.mp3 2:24 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, most liberty to most people, politics, humor no Sun, 08 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Totalitarianism is a threat from both The Left and The Right. For example, from The Left, there is a lot of historical precedence for fearing impending totalitarianism due to it being wrapped in collectivist moralizing. Collectivism demands that individuals give up their right to make many decisions for themselves, instead embracing a vague higher authority ideal. Once individuals have been convinced that someone else will be making decisions, they stop thinking for themselves and instead wait for instructions. Rather the higher authority is a benevolent committee looking out for everyone’s best interests, or a selfish dictator, is almost the same thing, and since consensus is difficult to achieve in committees, the eager persistence of strong-willed people with totalitarian impulses eventually prevail. Totalitarianism is also a danger from The Right since libertarian beliefs inevitably lead to extreme accumulation of wealth and de facto aristocracies. Eventually, the subsequent heirs of the wealthy take their good fortune for granted, that they somehow deserve adulation because of their superior breeding, that their ascendancy is a sign of their inherent good judgment, so it is only natural for them to assume what is best for them is best for everyone, and they have the power to make it so.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-24_437_totalitarianism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-24_437_totalitarianism.mp3 2:13 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash totalitarianism, humor, politics no Fri, 06 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy At first glance, "Libertarian Socialism," seems like a staggering oxymoron because the two ideologies diametrically oppose each other: the wants of individuals versus the needs of the group. However, it's a term useful to both Libertarians and Socialists because it can be distorted to mean whatever they want. In the case of socialists, they envision a society that they say is libertarian, an alluring ideology because everyone is in control of their own lives, to the point of demanding that other people perform at their command. And from the Libertarian side, Libertarian Socialism is fundamentally a subterfuge that ignores the Right of Violence, and socializes the great expense of protection while concentrating personal wealth into the hands of a few. Though coined over a hundred years ago, in modern political debate, the label “Libertarian Socialism” is intentionally adopted by Noam Chomsky to sow confusion. He is the undisputed expert in using linguistics to twist political narratives, and knows the battle is between collectivism and liberty, so he throws up linguistic conundrums to blur the distinction. To name your enemy is the first step in defeating it, so by not having a clear concept for group versus individual, the enemy remains obscured. Plus, Libertarian Socialism is tough terrain to attack, yet easy to defend because it purports to include everyone.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-24_436_libertarian_socialism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-24_436_libertarian_socialism.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash libertarian socialism, humor, politics no Wed, 04 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Conscientious people are attracted to Libertarian ideology because at its core it rewards the monetary success and personal achievement that comes from conscientious behavior. On the flip side, libertarians don't have much sympathy nor patience for flighty self-indulgence, and people who pay more attention to what others are doing than taking care of their own situations, which is what altruistic personalities look like to them. Luckily, both types exist or society could never have formed; somebody has to raise the children and care for the old while others build shelter and fight off the tribe across the hill. Both groups, if isolated, would collapse rather quickly: altruists due to failure to plan for the winter, and libertarians suffering the fate of all minorities that do not recognize that others around them have wants too. Libertarians are Free Market Capitalists. They're Republicans without religion and military adventurism. They embrace the concept of individual liberty but miss the essential component that will always discredit and undermine them: Libertarians don't try and turn those less successful than themselves into allies. You have to pay attention to how others around you are doing because The Deal may be working for you, but if most of the population think they can do better with a new Deal, they're going to take what they want from you by force.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-22_435_libertarian_blind_spot.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-22_435_libertarian_blind_spot.mp3 2:13 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash libertarian, humor, politics no Mon, 02 Jul 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Adam Smith is the most famous defender of Capitalism. He predicted that people making decisions in their own self-interest act like an invisible hand guiding society to higher and better performance, benefiting all citizens; a rising tide lifts all boats mythology. One of Smith's contemporaries was his friend, Thomas Hobbes, who concluded that citizens must contract with a sovereign to solve public problems. This emergence of thought was contemporary with the ideas of personal liberty elucidated by John Locke. That unique time in the Eighteenth Century was called The Enlightenment because for whatever strange, coincidental reasons, the creators of modern liberal ideology emerged together. Smith's proposed solutions to most problems is that individuals making their own choices for what is best for themselves will inevitably lead to an environment that is best for everyone. Hobbes' didn't disagree but he identified the situations where government would provide solutions that better served everyone. Both of these concepts were built on the framework of Locke who postulated a social contract that included the consent of the governed, and ideas that became part the American Constitution; the right to life, liberty and property. Upon the combined ideas of these three individuals, Jeffersonian America was constructed.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-22_434_the_enlightenment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-22_434_the_enlightenment.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash the enlightenment, adam smith, john locke, thomas hobbes, politics, humor no Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy On the world stage, the distinction between The Right and The Left are visible as national self-determination. Nationalism is the idea that the historical norms of a nation are important to the people that live under them even though individuals within those societies may not be on an even footing. In this context, The Right is Nationalist. In recent history, especially with the advent of the European Union, Globalism, the idea that all people are Citizens of the World and have Natural Rights that supersede national constraints, including borders, was gaining momentum. However, after all the sanctimonious words are spoken, unless the international corporations are benefited, touchie-feelie declarations of ideology were not enough to bring pressure on supranational organizations, like the U.N. or World Bank, to act unless there was the financial incentive of so-called Open Markets. Under the guise of Globalism, exporting nations like Germany use their financial power to subjugate the nationalism of less enthusiastic nations. The United States was, of course, also complicit in this deception. To implement the Globalist ideal, forcing it upon the world, Globalists use the rubric of Climate Change, extreme poverty, contagious disease, or some other sensational cause that exploits people's fear or altruism. These tactics are often employed to cower the populace with the idea that Globalism is not only logical, but it's unethical to question it. In recent years, resistance to the Globalist subterfuge has mounted, and national pride is overcoming the propaganda.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-20_433_nationalism_vs_globalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-20_433_nationalism_vs_globalism.mp3 2:49 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Nationalism, Globalism, humor, politics no Thu, 28 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Conservatism, reluctance to change status quo, is The Right's defining characteristic. The Right are those that are benefiting from how things are, which is threatened by an evolving value system, while those who would benefit from change tend to gravitate towards each other, which creates the de facto Left. Interestingly, because the idea of individual liberty, the notion of personal responsibility and reaping the rewards of suffering the consequences of one's own actions, also comes out of America's distant past, it is considered conservative. Religion has always played a big part in America, and The Right represents those long established values. Patriotism is part of The Right, ingrained in their psyche. They also have a strong streak of Libertarianism which lends itself to aristocratic tendencies, thinking that the families of the wealthy deserve their influential status, and that wealth and breeding demonstrate exceptionalism. This weakness of The Right's ideology inevitably leads to a Class system, but they seem not to be too concerned. If people naturally segregate into levels of competence, it must be God's will, or genetic. Adding one other ingredient to the mix of The Right's attributes, the concept of racial separation as natural, defines the Far Right.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-20_432_the_right.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-20_432_the_right.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash the right, the left, politics, humor no Tue, 26 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review some of the concepts we've discussed about The Left: The Left are those who think elites should make decisions for the rest of us. Marxist liberty is a lot like American liberty but without personal responsibility. Altruism and conscientiousness don't have to be at odds but they often are. Progressives exhibit the smugness that comes from lack of self-awareness. Social Democrats are a socialist-leaning Political Party hiding behind the rubric of democracy. Socialism both alleviates and causes angst. Some goals of society are simply better performed via socialism. Communism works to drag a society out of the Stone Ages. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-18_431_the_left_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-18_431_the_left_concepts.mp3 2:13 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, communism, altruism, conscientiousnes, humor, politics no Sun, 24 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Communism, or more generally, Marxism, is sometimes an appropriate economic and societal ideology, at least for the short term. The primary example of successful Marxism is the U.S. Military: elites making decisions for what is the best for The State at the expense of individuals, all means of production carefully controlled with no personal enrichment, and all soldiers treated uniformly in a strict hierarchy where no one soldier benefits from their personal talents or effort, and is expected to provide those talents and effort whenever it is needed. Militaries are quite effective for their intended narrow purpose but at the expense of most individual liberty. Since people prefer control over their own lives, the impetuous to sacrifice personal autonomy is only made for dire situations. However, for countries that seem stuck in stuck in time, unable to progress for physical or cultural reasons, Communism can be their best strategy for advancement. Capitalism requires profits; you can't make money from poor people or some Capitalist would be doing it already, so those poor people just pick their cotton by hand and ride their water buffalo in the fields for centuries while the rest of the world moves on. Here's where communism comes in, it doesn't require profits; as long as there's production someplace, the excess can be used to keep an communist economy going. Hence, the people of Russia paid for the tractors and machinery that the Kyrgyzstani people used during the time of the Soviet Union. As long as Russians paid for and managed Kyrgyzstan, it prospered, but when the Soviet Union disintegrated, Kyrgyzstan slowly slid back to its old ways. Communism is definitely "give a man a fish" rather than "teach him how to fish," but some people just can't get the hang of fishing.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-18_430_when_communism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-18_430_when_communism.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash communism, politics, humor no Fri, 22 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Capitalism works because it's based on adversarial relationships, which have the advantage of speed & efficiency, and self-interest, a source of tremendous motivation. Capitalism is the economic manifestation of individual liberty, which means individual rights are paramount, and rewards benefit individuals. However, society, though composed of individuals, operates for the group's best interests, via a kind of enlightened paternalism, where the needs of the group supersede the wants of any one individual. A purely socialist society takes complete control of the means of production to ensure the needs of the group are being satisfied, and economic rewards accrue to The State, or Workers via The State, obviously severely constraining individual liberty. Mathematically and ideologically, Capitalistic economies have the advantage when it comes to progress and improving the well-being of its citizens, but functions such as protection, welfare, healthcare, environment, and law perform better under a socialist umbrella that favors the good of the public over the enrichment of individuals. This is primarily how America is now, but the more socialist-leaning a nation becomes, usually through self-interested democracy of the lower tiers of the population, the more industries are subsumed by The State. Determining those functions is the purview of politics, and hotly contested.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-18_429_when_socialism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-18_429_when_socialism.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, humor, politics no Wed, 20 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Socialism is the mechanism by which Collectivists implement their group-needs-over-individual-rights ideology. The driving force behind collectivism is the inheritable human trait of altruism, which is a combination of positive reinforcement by a dopamine release into the pleasure center of their brains that comes from sanctimonious behavior, and the equally powerful motivation to reduce the angst they feel at the discomfort of another person. Socialist angst is a common thread running through our religious indoctrination that has bled into society's framework. To alleviate the suffering of The Poor is a basic component of human nature, stronger in some than in others, depending on the amount of dopamine released. Liberty is the concept that you are an island unto yourself, only subject to contracts you voluntarily engage in, while socialism is rife with implied obligations that adhere to you simply by being a human being, and there is even the explicit expectation that you are responsible for other people in general. People raised in America, the only Individual Liberty nation, are caught off-guard in a socialist setting where others are tacitly waiting for them to act because it is expected. Liberty-Americans aren't looking for nor aware of the social clues of obligation, and are embarrassed and confused when confronted about their perceived inaction, generating even more angst. Collectivists seem to induce angst in an ever-expanding cloud around them.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-16_428_socialist_angst.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-16_428_socialist_angst.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialist angst, humor, politics no Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Political Parties in Europe seem to be an almost random combination of political terms sandwiched together into familiar sounding names that are impenetrable to understanding what they really believe: Social Democrats being a prime example. The “social” part of their name refers to the concept that Workers have a right to the fruits of their labor, while “democrats” signifies that they want to exploit democracy as validation to force compliance. The insidious idea that simply because someone is peripherally involved in a company as an employee, that they have a right to claim part of of that company's success, regardless to how insignificant or replaceable their contribution, is more than Worker's Rights. It's Marxist dogma that a business is owned bottom-up by the employees instead of top-down by the people who provided the idea, capital, and leadership. This “stakeholder” idea is popular because there are dramatically more employees than there are entrepreneurs. Also in the Marxist tradition, there a many more people wanting food and housing than there are people providing it, so Social Democrats use the rubric of an ephemeral Dignity Right with an ever-expanded definition of “dignity,” to force the obligation upon society rather than leaving it an individual's responsibility to define their own dignity and make the choices necessary to achieve it. Social Democrats claim they are providing Marxist liberty, though at the unconscionable cost of taking other people's individual liberty, and use democracy as vindication for the taking.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-16_427_social_democrats.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-16_427_social_democrats.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social democrats, politics, humor no Sat, 16 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy President Theodore Roosevelt, my hero, was a "Progressive" back-in-the-day, the turn of the 20th Century, but would be called a "Liberal" today because progressive has always meant the next set of big goals, then once accomplished, progressive goals become conservative staples. Today's Progressives are the Marxists because even though their ideology is old, the Soviet Union collapsed in the early '90s after all, the ideas seem new to this current generation of young advocates, and there's the old Marxists who were driven underground during the Cold War but have always nibbled around the edges of the Democratic Party, biding their time until ripe, which is now. Smugness is a defining characteristic of Progressives because when you think you're the only one considering the future, especially if it's your children's future, sanctimony is a personal hazard. Smug people are remarkably self-confident, which is probably a requirement when predicting the future, and smugness is naturally optimistic, another advantage when building a society. The opposite of smugness would be self-awareness, recognizing your own selfish motivations for what they are, which requires critical thinking, an attribute of conscientiousness. Progressives tend to be more optimistic and smug, rather than staid and practical.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-14_426_progressive_smugness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-14_426_progressive_smugness.mp3 2:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash progressive, progressives, smug, smugness, politics, humor no Thu, 14 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The battle of nature vs. nurture, are we born who we are or are we a product of our environment, has pretty much been settled by Clinical Psychologists like Jordan Peterson: your genes determine who you are as a person, meaning you inherit the important ingredients like intelligence, conscientiousness and altruism. Intelligence most people understand even though it's politically incorrect to talk about, but that conscientiousness, the motivation to plan, act conservatively, and save, comes from your parents seems curious; and, altruism, putting others before yourself, is taught in many religions, but that you inherit those tendencies is also a rather new finding. Of course, it's only correlative, meaning the likelihood you will be like your parents is high but far from the same. There is no mutual exclusivity between the three components of self: intelligence, conscientiousness and altruism; you can have any mixture of all three. Interestingly, whichever of conscientiousness or altruism dominates tends to predispose your politics: if you are more conscientious, you are a Republican, and if you are more altruistic, a Democrat. (This might help explain why so many children are the same political affiliation as their parents.) Altruistic people tend to be egalitarian which explains the appeal of Marxist equality doctrine; and conscientious people have much success in life which explains their Libertarian streak. Unfortunately, the two groups are often in direct conflict, and both sides think the other is misguided, venal or stupid. Conscientious people think altruists are self-righteous, elitist weaklings who want to control the lives of others, while altruists think conscientiousness people are selfish, heartless stooges, only concerned about things not people. In a Social Media environment, there seems to be no compromise between the two thought-patterns; we all want control after all, and our vision of the world to win out.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-14_425_altruism_vs_conscientiousness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-14_425_altruism_vs_conscientiousness.mp3 2:59 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash altruism, conscientious, conscientiousness, humor, politics no Tue, 12 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The modern Left has adopted their own definition of "liberty," insisting all Western nations have liberty. They even have rankings where America is lacking in liberty as defined and determined by them. Post-Modernist Marxists do espouse a kind of liberty that recognizes people should have control over their lives, but it differs from American Jeffersonian liberty because it has no component of personal responsibility. This vital lack manifests in a couple of ways: first, they do not believe people should reap the rewards nor suffer the consequences of their own actions. Second, their liberty is not bounded by the liberty of others: they want to be able to dictate how people to treat them, address them, or think about them. For example, they want to force people to use self-selected gender pronouns, they want to limit speech they consider offensive, and they even want to penalize people for their thoughts even when not acted upon. It is unclear if Marxists intentionally confuse the definition of liberty, or if their ideology simply promotes self-absorption because their version conveniently allows them to control those around them. Personal liberty, on the other hand, requires self-awareness: the knowledge that other people have their own liberty, and that your actions, however central to your own well-being they might be, cannot infringe on others. Also, the idea that liberty requires responsibility is central to the American ideal. We assume that responsibility is part of the equation, so are caught unprepared when Marxists leave out that vital component. The war on liberty always seems to end up as a debate about definitions.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-12_424_marxist_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-12_424_marxist_liberty.mp3 2:50 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Marxism, Marxist, liberty, personal liberty, politics, humor no Sun, 10 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy France had a revolution in 1789, the same year that the U.S. form of government began in earnest, because their king spent all the country's money on things like supporting the American revolution; an exquisite irony. The French revolutionaries looked to the U.S. as an example of liberalism. Back then, liberalism was getting free of Kings, potentates, and the church; supposedly putting The People in charge through democracy. Those who believed in the power of an aristocracy sat on the right of the king, and those who thought their leaders should be democratically elected sat on the left. The liberal revolution played out over the Western World, however, the United States was first and took it one step further; not only did we overthrow our sovereign, but our concept of individual liberty made every person their own sovereign, whereas the French idea of liberalism stopped at usurping the power of The Crown to The People; the French still assumed decisions would be made by those elected into power, ostensibly for the good of everyone. What makes it really confusing is that The Left isn't the difference between political Parties, Republicans and Democrats, because both Parties have members who put liberty first; The Left in the U.S., who identify themselves Progressives, is like The Left in France, and instead espouse some form of Collectivism.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-12_423_the_left.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-12_423_the_left.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash The Left, collectivism, politics, humor no Fri, 08 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The tactics used to propel Identity Politics are blunt but effective: Controlling what people say is the most powerful weapon in the Identity Politics arsenal. Because being offended is subjective, it puts the person who claims it in control. “Nazi” is the Straight White Male equivalent of “nigger.” Hiding behind black balaclavas, hurting & intimidating, people is the irony of Antifa. Definitions of words like Nazi and fascism have been changed to cover for socialists and fascists. Inherited guilt, where children are responsible for the sins of their parents, is making a comeback. You don't have to listen too long to Black Lives Matter to hear “reparations.” Whisper campaigns require the listeners to be culpable. With outright violence held in check, bullying becomes the most effective method of intimidation. If you don't resist the people trying to topple your values and goals, they will. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-10_422_identity_politics_tactics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-10_422_identity_politics_tactics.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash identity politics, politics, humor no Wed, 06 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The Left, primarily draped in the confusing camouflage of Identity Politics, call themselves “The Resistance” since the election of Donald Trump. It's unclear what they're resisting? Apparently they seek the overthrow of a duly elected American President, or perhaps they mean The Patriarchy? Whatever, it bodes ill for anyone not playing the Identity game, and needs resisting of its own. This doesn't mean changing the minds of the women, minorities & weirdos who benefit from overturning the status quo, they've gained too much and aren't going to retreat one inch; instead engage in an environment where your resistance is observed by other people who haven't been turned yet, but will be if the Identity narrative remains fashionable and unchallenged. Your tactics are to get into a position of power and not let the Identity-mongers exploit your courtesy: get your own sympathetic volunteers to respond in a quid pro quo fashion; don't be cowed by online bullying; take pictures of Antifa and dox them online; write Letters to the Editor; keep a webpage going where insiders can leave leaks; boycott companies that cater to their demands; and stay politically active. Most of all, be sure to advertise your resistance to their resistance to whoever will listen.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-10_421_resisting_the_resistance.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-10_421_resisting_the_resistance.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash The Resistance, politics, humor no Mon, 04 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It used to be that The Right were the judgmental, sanctimonious scolds, usually in the context of organized religion, but The Left has assumed that dubious distinction. The Left is primarily made up of people that were bullied as children. Add the mantle of victimhood, and the anonymity of the Internet, and now as adults they form the army of Social Justice Warriors, the foot-soldiers of the Identity Politics movement. They think their time has come; it's their turn to bully others into conforming, and their weapon is scolding. They scold you about the “homeless” and the “handicapped;” they scold you about “schools,” especially “the children;” they scold you about “pesticides” and “natural fibers;” they threaten to boycott your business and smear your reputation. Social Media like Facebook and Twitter is how SJWs reinforce one another's confidence; their self-righteous posturing is an ever increasing-in-strength tornado of bullying. Standing up against them is a real challenge. If you should ever want to engage SJWs in Facebook-land, here's a hint: whenever they attack you personally (and they WILL, in packs), simply type the word "bully."   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-10_420_bullies__scolds.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-10_420_bullies__scolds.mp3 2:10 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash bullies, scolds, politics, humor no Sat, 02 Jun 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy For something like the #metoo movement to be effective, the audience who listens to it must be totally complicit in its intended use. There can be no dissenting voices because even casual consideration of destroying people's lives based on hearsay, and reinterpreted decades after the fact by faulty memories and the lens of self-interest, doesn't seem like a good idea. Anyone would reject this scenario out-of-hand, unless of course, the intent is to collapse the status quo, to take out The Patriarchy. How does #metoo even work? Apparently, every single decision-maker at a studio must accept the accusation as true and deliver the punishment without evidence, and not one person in authority has the backbone to stand up against the shouting. It's probably something that can only happen in the entertainment industry because it is both originator and subject to fads, faux outrage, insincerity, and acting is exactly their business. Want someone to pretend to be someone else, discussing made up topics to fool everyone around them, that's the movie business. Add to that the extra strength envy, spite, resentment and jealously of people who seek adoration, and #metoo seems more of a certainty than an aberration. There were always be whisper campaigns, it's only surprising it took so long to burst into the open.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-08_419_metoo.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-08_419_metoo.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash metoo, #metoo, humor, politics no Thu, 31 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The whole Black Lives Matter concept is political maneuvering: you have to stake out a position to make a deal; the stronger the position, the more you can ask for. Given BLM's prominence and quick success in dominating the spotlight, I suspect they will succeed. Is it good for everyone else? Hell no. Is it further dividing the country? Hell, yes, it's incredibly selfish, but so are all other political organizations. However, Black Lives Matter seems more cynical than most Special Interest Groups; for example, their funding: $100 million in donations, $33 million from George Soros himself? How legitimate does that seem? Second, if the intention is to drive races at each other's throats, Black Lives Matter is pushing all those buttons. Third, their scornful backlash against the rebuttal “all lives matter,” makes them appear irrational and militant. And why is the movement dominated by Black women? After decades of Great Society and Affirmative Action, things only seem to have gotten worse. The litany of Black problems isn't getting any better, and even liberal Whites are starting to think the incentives need to change, probably towards personal responsibility. Instead, Black Lives Matter are pushing hard in the other direction: Whites have had Black people at their beck-and-call long enough, they say, now it's time for Blacks to be the aristocracy. Black Lives Matter is really about Reparations; the idea is that Whites pay money to “Blacks,” a kind of reverse slavery. With Reparations, they insist, Blacks would be made equal, and things would be different...   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-08_418_black_lives_matter.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-08_418_black_lives_matter.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Black Lives Matter, BLM, politics, humor no Tue, 29 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The idea of inherited guilt, a Catholic dogma, is the foundation of Identity Politics. The biblical concept that the son is responsible for the deeds of his father is one of the issues America revolted against, yet that very idea is central to the Progressive theme of shared guilt for past racial & gender exploitation. How is it that this tactic was not disputed out-of-hand? Are people again held responsible for the supposed sins of their forefathers? Should discrimination now be the solution for discrimination in the past? This happened because we let the camel's nose under the tent with Affirmative Action, encouraging subsequent generations to think State-sponsored discrimination is an appropriate cure for social ills. Once the rules changed so that the color of your skin is not to be ignored but instead to be rewarded then it becomes advantageous to claim the benefits. Similarly, any other discriminating factor, such as sex, ethnicity, and religion in the specific cases of Jewry & Islam, are being exploited. All that was once a disadvantage is made to be advantageous, except in the case of Asians, they are simply ignored. Alas, everyone did not become a hero without some group becoming the villain, and of course, Old White Males are cast in that role. The children of Straight, White men are guilty, and in the climate of Identity Politics, everything they achieve is through so-called, “privilege,” not their own effort and hard work, and they owe what they have to those who were discriminated against in the past.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-06_417_inherited_guilt.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-06_417_inherited_guilt.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash guilt, inherited, afirmative actions, reverse, discrimination, politics, humor no Sun, 27 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There is a seemingly coordinated effort to redefine words to fit into the Identity Politics narrative. The Left has always used language as a weapon, and they're winning the language war now on the Internet by redefining words like “fascist,” “socialism,” and “Nazi” to serve their purposes. Since their goal is collectivism, of which socialism is an acknowledged example, any taint on the word “socialism” must be explained away. Nazi Germany's ideas about a citizen's role in The State certainly fit the old definition of socialism, however The Left's use of the words “Nazi” and fascism” as pejoratives posed a problem since both ideologies espoused socialism, so Leftists deny that Nazi Germany was socialist, even though Nazis called themselves socialists and the word “Nazi” is an acronym for National Socialism. The fact-checking website, Snopes, contorts language to explain that Nazis were not real socialists, and neither are fascists. In fact, they claim fascists are Right Wing because they use violence, even though Antifa uses the same tactics, so Google's definition of "fascism" is subtly different than traditional dictionary definitions so as not to apply to Antifa, and Wikipedia's description of "socialism" has also recently changed in a similar way. There are more insidious techniques of word redefinition; for example, Google changes the order of search results and hence perceived authority; and the autofill options are being winnowed to channel selections away from negative news about Hillary Clinton. Also, YouTube is on a crusade to demonetize and even remove accounts they deem inappropriate: Jordan Peterson, the renown liberal Clinical Psychologist noted for resisting The Left, was defined as “Alt-Right” and his accounts blocked. Lastly, there is no way to have any kind of real debate on Facebook or Twitter without endless nitpicking of the definition of words, making this compromise of language quite effective at silencing discussion.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-06_416_changing_definitions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-06_416_changing_definitions.mp3 3:03 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash definitions, redefinition, nazi, fascism, politics, humor no Fri, 25 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There is true disrespect, even hate, from the young towards old white males, probably the result of the constant association of white males with all that is bad in the world. Most of the people involved in Antifa were raised on entertainment where the only villains were white men because all other groups complained they were being discriminated against. Though businessmen were often the culprit, Nazis were the ultimate bad guy. Calling someone a “Nazi” has been an online staple for decades, even having its own adage, Godwin's law, and its use has increased in effect; now “Nazi“ has become pejorative code for White men, the White equivalent to “nigger.” Every attempt to organize against The Left is equated to Nazis: join a pro Free Speech rally, you're a Nazi; point out the hypocrisy of feminists ignoring the plight of Islamic women, Nazi; suggest that criminal Illegal Immigrants should be deported, can't get more Nazi than that. The Identity Politics crowd excuse their obvious heckling of White men under the guise of attacking the few real Nazis who might exist, though those only seem to be on TV since I've never encountered one in real life, but that was before I recognized that they were talking about - me.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-04_415_nazi.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-04_415_nazi.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Nazi, politics, humor no Wed, 23 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Even virtual civil wars require strong-arm tactics and intimidation in real life. Once “fascism” was equated to “Nazi” as an inexcusable topic even to discuss, the idea arose that a group should forcibly counter this imaginary horde of fascists, so emerged the anti-fascists, or Antifa, and anybody who is not in lock step with the Identity Politics narrative is a target. Online bullying is their first option but if wrong-thinkers appear in public, the black balaclava-wearing pseudo-soldiers would respond to shut them down. Antifa is primarily composed of disgruntled people who would benefit from the disruption of the status quo: the underemployed; coffee baristas and food-servers at vegan restaurants; and, of course, many students looking for the meaning of life, and a cause to adhere to. The idea that these so-called counter-demonstrators could intentionally conceal their identities is mystifying since most States have Anti-Masking laws. Apparently the line is fuzzy but it seems obvious that once intimidation and violence breaks out that those laws should spring into effect. Unfortunately, the politicians who control the police forces in places like San Francisco and Portland are sympathetic to the cause. The really concerning part is just how many Antifas show up to disrupt an event; it's sometimes 100s to 1. The ranks of the disaffected are apparently huge, and the lure of anonymity is a strong one. Aspiring Antifas, in their homemade black uniforms and masks seem to be unaware of the irony of their own fascism.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-04_414_antifa.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-04_414_antifa.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Antifa, fascism, humor, politics no Mon, 21 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Like the Free Speech movement before it in the 1960s, Berkeley is the origin of the Anti-Free Speech movement today. Most people who hear about this challenge to the First Amendment, even on The Left, can't believe it, especially if they remember that era. However, younger people have no reverence for Free Speech and actually find it appalling that anyone can say anything they want even if someone else finds it offensive. Anti-Free Speech is also important to limit communication among those resisting the overthrow of The Patriarchy. To this end, as bizarre as it may seem, even logic, facts, and truth are suppressed because they undermine the cause: if the other side is allowed to talk, their arguments would be compelling to those who have not yet realized there is a Virtual Civil War on. The most common tactic to “deplatform” speech is to use a Heckler's Veto, disrupting a group quietly ready to listen to a main speaker. Deplatforming is very effective and simple to perform by exploiting the courtesy of an audience not accustomed to the tactic, and its success gives the heckler a feeling of empowerment. This is probably only a short-term advantage to the hecklers because counter-measures are possible but it will reduce turnout to subsequent speech events because normal people also wish to avoid things that cause conflict, even when they should be causing conflict. The best way to counter the Anti-Free Speech movement is to engage in Free Speech: don't let yourself be shut down by rudeness and intimidation. Unfortunately, in the Social Network online environment, Free Speech has mostly been restrained by corporate moderators at YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, etc. Anti-Free Speech is a growing and powerful force that will take commitment by liberty-loving Americans to overcome.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-02_413_anti-free_speech.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-02_413_anti-free_speech.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Free Speech, Anti Free Speech, politics, humor no Sat, 19 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There is no better way to seize control than by making an issue subjective with you deciding. Being offended is the perfect foil; not only can only you decide whether or not you are offended, you also get to control the timing of the offense, and and corrective action. You can even demand penalties on the person who offended you. The “I'm offended” attack is one that exploits the courtesy of others and, unfortunately, has no real defense without conflict or retreat. The old Sticks & Stones adage is completely ignored, and as long as being offended has such high rewards, it will continue. The Left uses the "I'm offended" attack in almost every confrontation. They demand "safe spaces" and special treatment to alleviate their offense. It's an old tactic; the “do not use foul language in my presence” crowd has exercised the Offended attack for most of the history of this country but the strategy has now been weaponized. It has gone so far as to directly threaten Free Speech; in fact, The Left has been successful in limiting speech online, and even has laws in place to compel speech so as not to “offend.” “Your Majesty,” used throughout the ages by those who sought dominance dusted off in a time where few students know history.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-02_412_offended.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-05-02_412_offended.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash offense, offended, politics, humor no Thu, 17 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the top issues having to do with Identity Politics: Losers in The American Dream are trying to kick over the card table rather than play by the rules. Identity Politics claims rewards based on skin color, sex, and subjective personal identity. Elites think that their opinions & values should be everyone else's. University Social Sciences departments are the Basic Training grounds of Identity Politics warriors. Human Resources departments are used to infiltrate Identity Politics into the workplace. The powerful Tech sector uses their extraordinary integration into everyone's lives to promote Leftist causes. Weirdos aggressively exploit the courtesy that living in a liberty society demands. Marxist philosophy is back but with the grievance of Oppressed vs. Oppressors. News & Entertainment have been compromised to deliver a biased political message. The Constitution's role of protecting the minority has been exploited to give Minority Rule. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-30_411_identity_politics_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-30_411_identity_politics_concepts.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Identity, Identity politics, humor, politics no Tue, 15 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The Constitution acts as a counter-force to democracy, protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority, but The Constitution now serves a role the Founders never imagined, which is subjecting the majority to the whims of the minority. Cases-in-point: transgender bathrooms, disabled parking & access, religious accommodations, and onerous safety regulations. Small Special Interest groups have been able to leverage The Constitution into committing the violence of The State for their own selfish aims, the majority of citizens be damned. When people think of democracy, they imagine large numbers of folks each expressing their self-interested opinion, and the majority wins out. This seems much better than the strongest people simply forcing whatever they want on everyone, and history up until now has proven democracy a better choice. However, to implement democracy, every person, especially the strong and numerous, must give The State a monopoly on violence; no one else except The State is allowed to use it. This is where the weakness of democracy undermines its implementation because, in fact, most people do not participate in voting, allowing a fraction to tell everyone else what to do. Social Media has coalesced these minorities into strong voting blocks that make a mockery of democracy and The Constitution, to the point that the majority is now bullied by the minority, a complete reversal. The weaklings have taken control.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-30_410_minority_rule.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-30_410_minority_rule.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash minority, majority, democracy, politics, humor no Sun, 13 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Entertainers, feeling guilty for their tremendous success for so little contribution, find solace in adopting the vocal hair-shirt altruism of The Left. The occasional Right-leaning actor is scorned and shunned, a reverse McCarthyism. The awards shows drip sanctimony, and even football has been infected. They excuse their loss of viewership to everything but alienating the audience, because in their minds, nobody could hold any opinion but theirs, and if someone does, they must be stupid or racist. Capture of the Main Stream Media by The Left could very well have been an organized takeover: MSNBC was certainly intentional, and the financial propping up of otherwise failing news outlets like The New York Times, Washington Post, and Time Magazine only make sense if the propaganda value is recognized. The Right has been neglectful in this regard, valuing these outlets on a monetary basis without including their intrinsic political value, so they have lost the megaphone. The proportions certainly are not representative of real life; no wonder Fox News, the only counter-narrative, has such a large viewership, because the rest of the mainstream media is shrilly Left-biased, particularly CNN, but even historical news organizations like CBS, NBC & ABC. When PBS is the least biased news source, you know there's a problem.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-30_409_biased_news__entertainment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-30_409_biased_news__entertainment.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash biased news, biased, biased entertainment, politics, humor no Fri, 11 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Marxism is a very alluring ideology to the bottom half of the population that benefits from taking from the top half. It never really caught on in the U.S. even though early in the last Century it was being promoted in the labor unions, and had significant popular support. The emerging Middle Class, focus on individual liberty, and belief in The American Dream of a classless society, never really gave Marxism much traction, and after the ignominious demise of the Soviet Union, Marxists had no place to go. But leave it to French Intellectuals to recast the Marxist Us vs. Them Class narrative into an Us vs. Them Oppression narrative where The Patriarchy is the “oppressor,” and Identity Groups are the “oppressed.” Everybody wants to think their lot is life would be better if not for some outside force holding them down; and with academia, Hollywood, and feminism providing cover, victimhood of the oppressed has been eagerly adopted. We are preprogrammed in society to sympathize with Victims; we want them to be made whole, and punishing the culprits can also be satisfying. The Oppression culture taps into this subliminal support: to equate past oppression of a particular Identity as victimizing them; race or sex being the most obvious examples. These feelings are successfully exploited in business and government by preying on the vague guilt we all feel when we compare our relatively comfortable and secure lives to most of the rest of the world, or people from the past. It's an effective strategy, and oppression mongering has been very successful in changing the goals of society to become the goals of the “oppressed.”   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-28_408_oppression_mongers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-28_408_oppression_mongers.mp3 2:42 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash oppression, oppressors, politics,humor no Wed, 09 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy A Two-Party system combined with Social Media allows tiny segments of the population to wield power far greater than their small numbers may suggest. How did self-identify which bathroom to use ever seem reasonable? How did an old man in make-up, with balls intact & conservative politics, become a cause celebre? How did gender pronouns get banned in colleges? This mouse-that-roared situation all started in the Gay community due to legitimate concerns, and they successfully fought back using demonstrations, political maneuvering, poetic language, and shaming. A Gay Rights parade is more than spectacle; it puts the world on notice that anyone willing to dress publicly in assless chaps isn't going to be afraid to get right in your face: sell us the damn wedding cake or we'll shut down your business. Via these intimidation tactics, Gay Rights have become preferential Rights, and every other special interest group witnessing the victory is following the same aggression playbook. Gay men are in many positions of power, and like all cohesive special interest groups, do business and favors amongst themselves. Gay mongering probably would have stopped with their overwhelming success at acceptance and integration, but a working tactic is always exploited until it breaks, so other similar groups adopted the strong-arm strategy as their own. In today's Victimhood environment, claiming discrimination both feels sanctimonious and brings with it notoriety, recognition and control: they control the narrative, they control the media, they control the legal system, and they demonize anyone who gets in their way. Fascism exists but it's hiding under a different rock than the one everyone is scrutinizing: Straight White Males aren't the problem.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-28_407_lgbtkkk.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-28_407_lgbtkkk.mp3 3:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash LGBT, politics, humor no Mon, 07 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Somehow, probably because of their youth and the fact that they congregate in areas like San Francisco and New York, people who work in tech are overwhelmingly Lefty political ideologues. The smarter you are, the more successful you are at a young age, with people surrounding you similarly young & successful, it turns you into an elite. These people just naturally think they know better than everyone else, the proof is all around them, and there's nobody saying differently; certainly their parents and the education system has always identified them as special. Add to this, compromised Human Resources Departments selecting job applicants based on their Identity, and the situation is compounding. Many in the Tech Left were bottom-rungers on the status quo social ladder, but now with their newfound power over information, they revel in their ability to stifle points of view they don't agree with, and castigate those they feel are not as enlightened. The situation is exacerbated at the very top of these organizations: founder of Amazon, Jeff Bezos, purchased the insolvent but influential Washington Post as a megaphone for his Lefty beliefs. Eric Schmidt at Google similarly exploits his power to subtly interfere with online searches and definitions in an attempt to control The Left's narrative. Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook thinks her politics should be shared by the users. Disney's Kathleen Kennedy has stoked the ire of loyal fans by infusing Identity into every project she's involved with. The Tech Left is the biggest influence shifting society left, and that's saying a lot.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-19_406_the_tech_left.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-19_406_the_tech_left.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash tech left, politics, humor no Sat, 05 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Most of the graduates with useless social science degrees, as indoctrinated and hostile to the status quo as they might be, actually have little impact on society at large. Why would anyone hire them with such poor preparation to provide anything of value to an organization? Unfortunately, the most insidious impact these programs make is the training of Human Resources personnel. Through this simple mechanism, Identity Politics has found a wide-open conduit into the most powerful and influential organizations in society. Whether intentional or not, taking the control of big business through the choke-point of Human Resources was a genius move. These people aren't terribly intelligent, and are dominated by women and effeminate men who exploit their positions of leverage to dominate the workforce with Identity Politics warriors. In the past, Personnel departments were a powerless after-thought, but in the wake of inclusiveness, HR has become a juggernaut rolling over more conscientious reservations through threat of lawsuits and bad publicity. No business executive wants to be subjected to public pillory, nor are they willing to risk their career to ensure merit over motive. The only solution to this debacle is for organizations to consciously push back against the Identity Politics narrative: if your programming company is mostly young Asian men because 90% of the best applicant's are young Asian men then say so, and reject the quotas imposed on you from the outside. And if mostly women are attracted to work as nurses, accept it; same with garbage men, soldiers and construction workers. How come there aren't HR departments at the sewage treatment plant?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-19_405_human_resources_subversion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-19_405_human_resources_subversion.mp3 2:48 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash human resources, HR, HR department, politics, humor no Thu, 03 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy When students have borrowed huge sums of money to attend college but are unprepared or unqualified to succeed, the schools don't stop taking their money, instead they shuffle these hapless students into useless and irrelevant social studies programs about “women” or “gender,” whose professors are overwhelming, if not totally Left-leaning. This is the infection vector of Identity Politics ideology. Students wouldn't even be in these programs if they hadn't failed out of their original plan so they already have damaged self-esteem and are totally susceptible to the claim that there is something special about them, that they are victims, and the most obvious sign of their victimhood is the color of their skin or the shape of their genitals. To recover their self-esteem, it's implied they probably would have gotten through their original degree if they hadn't been discriminated against, now or in the past. Outrage ensues, built on a Marxist foundation that can only exist in the sequestered university environment of tenure, and clueless, sanctimonious & self-righteous student activism. The instructors in these programs went through a similar process and their resolve has been hardened over the years, especially after making it through the educational gauntlet ending in a professorship in one of these august institutions, a professorship that they know in their hearts means nothing, a degree that means nothing, not achieved via merit, a farce. Of course they're disgruntled, and they pass their embitterment onto their students. Frankly, the solution is probably to shut these contrived, money-grubbing institutions down altogether.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-18_404_university_infection.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-18_404_university_infection.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social studies, discrimination, identity, politics, humor no Tue, 01 May 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The word “elite” is often applied to people who think they should be allowed to dictate policy because of their special status or knowledge, something liberty-conscious Americans are highly suspect of and only reluctantly accept unless based on merit. Unfortunately, The Collectivist Left is infused with a sense of grand superiority, that their values should be everyone's, and that anybody who disagrees is either stupid or evil. There will always be people who think like this, it's human nature, but when they got into governmental power as they did via appointments during the Obama administration, they are literally tearing the nation apart. Identity Politics plays a big part of the schism because many of the appointments were not made from merit but instead due to the applicant's Identity as a women, minority, or some other self-perceived oppressed class. If you know your job and success in life is a result of your Identity, rather than admit there may be someone more qualified than yourself, you become an advocate of the method that got you there, because if all people are also selected because of their Identity then there is no negative reflection on you for having been, and other people of your Identity reassure and reinforce your belief that you are elite.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-18_403_elites.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-18_403_elites.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash elite, elites, politics, humon, identity no Sun, 29 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The goal of Identity Politics is to reverse power and control from the status quo to identity groups that have historically not been as successful in a societal game, The American Dream, that involves conscientiousness, aggression, and personal responsibility. They battle against what they call “the patriarchy,” which are the traditional values of meritocracy, competence & entrepreneurship. The strategy is: if you can’t win by the rules, change the rules. They want new rules, ones they have the advantage in, specifically their Identity; being a woman, minority or weirdo. Their alliances are easy to identify as "the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” where men are the enemy, specifically Old White Men. Their success in promoting Identity has been astounding: an entire generation has been trained that personable responsibility is oppression, that Free Speech is offensive, that meritocracy is privilege. Over the past couple of decades, the purveyors of Identity Politics have used Identity-based complaints as cover to justify their reversal of power: for example, claiming "unequal pay" or “hostile work environment” is purely subjective and unsubstantiated, but highly believable and effective as a lever. Their targets are almost exclusively White men and organizations run by White men. Accusations are their weapon, and patient infiltration is their tactic; first into government, then into academia, and most effective, capturing the purveyors of opinion, which includes the mainstream media and entertainment industry. Any Whites that resist them are called “White Nationalists,” an irony that goes unmentioned since American nationalism is the only Identity the Identity-mongers reject, however, the election of Donald Trump shows that resistance is forming.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-17_402_identity_politics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-17_402_identity_politics.mp3 3:08 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash identity, patriarchy, politics, humor no Fri, 27 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy "The Patriarchy" is code for what those of us in a previous generation grew up with as “The American Dream,” which rewards meritocracy. This includes science, scholastic achievement, merit-based bonuses, and anything where there is competition that the best wins out. Since the founding of America, this dream has created lots of winners which provided success and progress, but also lots of losers, comparatively speaking. The advent of social media has brought anybody generally dissatisfied with their life together in a battle that has the chance for them to emerge as the winners. Their strategy is simple but apparently not obvious because they have been executing their plan unrecognized for decades: first change the goals, then change the rules, then go to war. Examples of changing the goals: accomplishments don’t mean anything. They're denigrated as White Cis-gendered Privilege; so that everyone’s opinion is as valid as anyone else’s. Conscientiousness is now cast as meanness, such that no constraints are considered valid, either in government or personal life, when pitted against subjective, self-centered sanctimony. And Diversity rather than assimilation, so that a person's dissimilarity from the rest of society becomes an advantage. Examples of changing the rules: Identity supersedes merit as with Affirmative Action. Guilty until proven innocent; the #metoo campaign requires no supporting evidence for penalties. Feelings before facts; commentary is considered news. And worst of all, being offended supersedes Free Speech. So far the rebels in the Virtual Civil War have been successful by exploiting the courtesy and conflict-avoidance ingrained in the rest of us, and it's not just to the detriment of White men; all of us on the other side are considered The Patriarchy.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-17_401_overthrowing_the_patriarchy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-04-17_401_overthrowing_the_patriarchy.mp3 2:53 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash patriarchy, American Dream, politics, humor no Wed, 25 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Science has a lot of unappreciated concepts that need review: Quantum Theory is randomness is stochastic processes is emergent order is evolution is the secret of the universe. Landing on the moon was much more than a moon landing. If you do not plan for the Luddites around you, their goals will become yours. Progress comes from catastrophe quicker than it evolves naturally. There is no energy shortage, and there never has been, there's only been market & political manipulation of energy. There are plenty of Climate Change solutions but climate change isn't the problem, Globalism is. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-09-01_400_science_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-09-01_400_science_concepts.mp3 1:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash science concepts, politics, humor no Mon, 23 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy "Climate Change" has been exposed as a Trojan Horse for political Globalism but that doesn't mean there's nothing to it. The climate's going to change regardless of whether humans played a part, but even the worse projections are well within the range that earth has experienced in its long history. Whether the change is for the better or worse hasn't even been determined, but people are conservative by nature, and changing climate scares them, period. Assuming some of the change is bad, meaning not enough water & food, or too hot to live without air conditioning, or ocean rise, what would be solutions we could plan for now? The first goal is an honest national discussion because there are plenty of scientific, engineering and management opportunities available to us, it simply requires leadership. For example, if carbon emissions is the problem, nationalize the natural resources then charge the true price for a gallon of gasoline; if electricity is the problem then adopt nuclear power; if flooding is the problem, move cities inland; if food production is the problem, create more GMO food, and; if too many people is the problem then promote birth control with a vengeance. All of these solutions can be addressed and planned for now, so why aren't they? I suspect the real enemy is NOT Climate Change, it's neo-Luddites & Collectivists who want to use the manufactured worldwide emergency to propel their own selfish political agendas.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-09-01_399_climate_change_solutions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-09-01_399_climate_change_solutions.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash climate change, politics, humor no Sat, 21 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Electric cars are almost here, thank goodness. Burning up incredibly valuable and irreplaceable petroleum just to move our overweight butts around borders on criminal. We need petroleum for so many more important things, such as plastics, chemicals, lubricants, asphalt, and fertilizers; not to mention the environment damage of releasing all those hydro-carbons into the atmosphere. However, increasing electricity demand requires increasing electricity production, and using oil for that doesn't solve the problem. Coal-for-oil is not a desirable trade-off, damming rivers is out, and geothermal, wind, wave, and solar all offer only a pittance of the energy needed. Where do we go? With nuclear power, there is no energy shortage. Nuclear-generated electricity is almost free, and new reactor technologies are now emerging from companies such as NuScale, Hyperion, mPower, and Toshiba that address past complaints. These reactors are all small, truck transportable, safe from terrorists, and produce minimal amounts of radioactivity and waste. Nuclear power was the wave of the future in the past. The abandonment of nuclear power was an unfortunate side-effect of the Cold War, but the generation that will soon be assuming political office, and the voters who select them, will not have the same irrational fear of the word "nuclear." It seems probably that a decade or two from now we will see full utilization of this unlimited energy source. It only takes political will and the passing-on of the "no" generation.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-09-01_398_energy_shortage.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-09-01_398_energy_shortage.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash energy shortage, nuclear, energy, politics, humor no Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Maybe because it makes people uncomfortable, or perhaps folks just aren't aware, but no one ever talks about how wars, disease & famine leave the survivors better off in a physical prosperity & available opportunities sense. This concept has a lot of the zero-sum-gain view of an economy that central planners hate to admit exists, but the truth is, your neighbor's loss is your gain. You get the good job, the accouterments of fine living & in the case of war, the beautiful women; and you inherit all the wealth rather than have to share with relatives. Evolution tends to be very sexist and Machiavellian; strife & catastrophe seem to be the best catalyst for societal improvement. The seminal counter-example is the famous Mouse Utopia experiment, where the colony's ultimate doom in the face of prosperity had such an illogical conclusion that it's terrifying. Anyone who reads the history of that tragedy cannot help but be mortified. Would that be the fate of humans in times of plenty? Would comfort & lack of want inevitably lead to sexual perversion, sloth & mental illness? We want to think human intelligence would overcome whatever it was that befell the mice, but we suspect not. My guess is that the actions of individuals trying to better themselves makes all the difference, and without that, we sink into oblivion.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-31_397_catastrophe_initiates_progress.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-31_397_catastrophe_initiates_progress.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash progress, catastrophe, politics, humor no Tue, 17 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The term "Luddite" is used to describe someone who wants to stop innovation & science, even go back to some imagined simpler time. That would be okay, the Amish certainly prove it's possible, but Luddites aren't satisfied with just having control over their own destiny, they want everyone to do as they say for their own selfish, sanctimonious reasons: stop artificial intelligence, stop genetic engineering, stop space exploration. Some of this comes from religious fundamentalism, some of it from fear of the unknown, but most of it is the discomfort people feel from having to adapt to radical new things. Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, predicted "Major anti-technology movements will be active in the U.S. and elsewhere by 2030." That date seems arbitrary but considering the trajectory of politics in America & the World, a rebellion of some sort does seem to be brewing, the Luddites are gathering strength, and the one boogeyman anyone can get behind is something they don't understand. I can barely understand technology today, what will it be like a decade from now? How about two? Frankly, I can't wait.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-31_396_luddites.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-31_396_luddites.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Luddite, politics, humor no Sun, 15 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy My childhood was defined by moon landings. Every kid wanted to be an astronaut, and science ruled in schools. That simple footprint in the lunar dust created a generation of engineers; an otherwise tough, unrecognized, poorly remunerated, but incredibly important field. It wasn't just the idea of space travel that captured our attention, it was the youth of the whole thing: Controllers at the time of the first lunar landing had an average age of 26, and the average age of NASA engineers on Apollo 11 was 28. In comparison, the average age of a Google employee is 29, similar to other tech companies, but for some reason the moon landings seems so virile while database management is simply effeminate. I think, in retrospect, moon landings were about men: "spaceman," "first man on the moon," "leap for mankind;" the language was rife with masculinity. No one has been to the moon since, the inspiration is gone. What happened? Was it for the same reason the world's oceans are mostly unexplored, there just isn't anything that captures people's imaginations? Or is it something bigger than that? It's no coincidence that social & political metamorphoses has simultaneously changed the nature of society's ambitions, and that testosterone-based national goals are no longer en vogue. In fact, a quarter of Americans think we spend too much on space exploration, and a third of Republicans & Independents think the moon landing was a hoax. With numbers like that, there will never be another footprint.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-30_395_moon_landing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-30_395_moon_landing.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash moon landing, man landing on the moon, politics, humor no Fri, 13 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy You hear the word "quantum" used a lot in popular culture & quack science, though its origins is real science. It was postulated by German physicist Max Planck in 1900, for which he won the Nobel Prize, but what does it really mean? Ironically enough, it means the opposite of what Einstein said it meant when he quipped, "God does not play dice." Oh, but He does. Quantum mechanics is the theory that life is not deterministic, meaning it can only be predicted statistically, even though the equations look a lot like physics. On the one hand, physics assumes the universe is a giant clockwork, and knowing the precise attributes of the gears can predict the precise outcome of the process, but Quantum Theory is almost the exact opposite, that the universe is random, that its components & sub-particles must be guesstimated for a probabilistic outcome. In computer science we use term "stochastic," meaning randomly determined patterns, and in economics it sounds a lot like "emergent order," the Classical Liberal political & economic philosophy that randomness spontaneously creates organized results, and, of course, there's the theory of evolution. When so many divergent sources come to the same conclusion, it seems likely that quantum theory is indeed the secret of the universe.     Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-30_394_quantum_theory.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-30_394_quantum_theory.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash quantum theory, politics, humor no Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The concept of conning people doesn't seem to be sinking in, let's review: You are judged based on your status, not your competency. The Wealthy assume their financial success is due to their own efforts, and that everyone else simply didn't have what it takes. Ponzi schemes are the result of seeking simple solutions to difficult problems. Under-funded pensions are the seeds of financial collapse. NGOs exploit our inherent sense of charity & shame, without any of their own. The current state of America's affairs could go on forever... But it most probably won't. America's highly polarized future will leave liberty the loser. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-29_393_con_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-29_393_con_concepts.mp3 1:59 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash cons, politics, humor no Mon, 09 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy America's National Debt has increased for the past 40 years, and there's no reason to think that trend is going to change. Stimulus spending keeps things going, that plus the U.S. dollar being the world's reserve currency, but at some point, things that can't go on forever, won't. Our current trajectory is not sustainable, especially with the fracturing of political power into diverse groups verses a huge upcoming Retirement Class of coalesced political power. Even though liberty is under extreme pressure, it's still increasing due to increasing productivity, but as the economy is put under stress, and opportunity gets more-n-more concentrated into the hands of the wealthy, the ideal of the-most-liberty-for-the-most-people is threatened, especially considering that the two most likely futures for America are at the extreme ends of the Right-Left spectrum: either most-liberty-to-whoever-gets-there-first or no liberty at all. It's easily predictable that increasing wealth inequality can only lead to future wealth redistribution. The most likely possibility is a Universal Basic Income, where everyone is given free money, enough not to have to have a job. Democracy has a tendency to promote such illogical solutions, and it will work for a time, until consumption exceeds production, and a collapse occurs. The sustainable solution is high Progressive taxation & confiscatory inheritance taxes, but that would take a consolidation of political power into competent but benign hands, probably after some severe financial upheaval, a situation also prone to totalitarianism, so the odds of things in the future turning out better than now are problematic.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-29_392_americas_future.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-29_392_americas_future.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash America's future, politics, humor no Sat, 07 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Humans are born optimists, it's evolutionary: tribes that trust their members survive as a group and lone-wolves parish. In modern times, this optimism has led to Stock Markets, pension funds, Social Security & landing on the moon. Not a bad trade-off, really, but one wonders if it can go on forever? We don't tax The Rich enough, which requires Government to print money to give to the electorate, but then The Rich complain because they aren't getting rich fast enough so taxes are cut even more, which requires Government to print more money. And because of "Free" Trade, foreigners are doing all the jobs so there's a push for a Basic Income, moving the country faster towards Collectivism. It all seems to be working out because The Rich are happy getting richer, foreigners are happy being paid with imaginary money, and people are happy to think they don't have to work for a living, but it's not going to go on forever...   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-29_391_go_on_forever.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-29_391_go_on_forever.mp3 1:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash forever, politics, humor no Thu, 05 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Non-Governmental Organization, NGO, is the Politically Correct term for charity because charity implies a non-egalitarian situation where one person gives to another out of kindness, rather than forced to as Marxist doctrine would dictate. Another huge difference between NGOs & charities is shame: people who provide charity would be ashamed if they siphoned off the majority of the contributed money by way of salaries, but NGOs live by the credo that the work they do is just as important, perhaps more important, than the work of the people who contributed the money, so they should get compensated accordingly: the erstwhile beneficiaries are of secondary importance. This attitude probably germinated because NGOs get a lot of their money from Government grants, and tax-payer money holds no reverence. NGOs may be tax exempt, a good concept for a real charity, but there's no doubt an NGO's primary purpose is to pay the people who work for them: 5% to the supposed charitable function, 95% to so-called overhead. There are legitimate NGOs, for example Doctors Without Borders pays their doctors only subsistence wages, and it's not that difficult to distinguish between exploitation and beneficence: the head of the Red Cross's multi-million dollar salary is clearly an obscenity; I won't even donate to Red Cross because of it. The fact is, NGOs work because most of the people who give don't care where the money goes; they were just virtue signaling anyway: being seen wearing a pink bandanna at Run For The Cure was all they were interested in.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-28_390_ngos.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-28_390_ngos.mp3 2:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash NGO, non-governmental organization, politics, humor no Tue, 03 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Nothing says predicting the future like saving for retirement, and when somebody else is supposedly saving for retirement for you, that is a recipe for disaster. The bailout of the auto industry was to keep the pension payments going to their almost one-million retirees. Puerto Rico is seeking statehood in a last ditch effort to save their pensions, and of course, the Wall Street bailout was all about saving the pension funds which had invested, not the banks. The numbers are staggeringly bad: of the 1,400 private, union-run pension plans, three-quarters are less than half funded, a total $600 billion deficit, and public sector pensions obligations are truly astonishing, almost $6 trillion: a twentieth of all the wealth in America is owed to retired government workers. But that's dwarfed by the immorality of Social Security, which requires a full quarter of America's total wealth just to make up the difference between what's owed and what's paid in, made even worse because all the paid-in monies have been absorbed into the Debt, so aren't available anyway. We are literally talking about taking from the poor, productive members of society, and giving to the rich, unproductive retirees. Combine that with sanctimonious mewling, abuse of social courtesy, and political grandstanding, and the mess that results has no solution short of a complete financial breakdown, scraping the bottom, and rebuilding after shedding the pension baggage.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-27_389_pensions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-27_389_pensions.mp3 2:49 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash pensions, politics, humor no Sun, 01 Apr 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Ponzi schemes have no real money of their own, they take in new money from the many, and pay out slightly less to the few, while the middle-man takes a cut for organizing the whole thing. There is no connection between what you pay in & what you supposedly get out, the money goes to other people & some amount is skimmed off the top. Virtually all insurance policies are Ponzi schemes, but as long as there are more suckers than there are lucky winners, nobody questions the efficacy or ethics of the situation. Government-run Ponzi schemes are the most egregious. If the numbers actually made sense, private annuity & retirement funds would be doing it, not The State. By allowing the Ponzi scheme lie to go unquestioned, more will sprout up. For example, Oregon is starting a State Social Security scam of its own. Because they steal from the future to give to the present, which has always been a hallmark of self-serving idealism, our Social Security, Medicare, government pensions & National Debt Ponzi schemes are on their way to collapse, leaving inflation as the only future option, which actually isn't such a bad solution.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-27_388_ponzi_schemes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-27_388_ponzi_schemes.mp3 2:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Ponzi, politics, humor no Fri, 30 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy 1%ers sit in financial conferences congratulating themselves on their prescience & business acumen. In their world, wealth is to be accumulated by the forward thinkers, innovators & hard workers like themselves. The fact that they are a small minority of the population, and that their gains are at a relative loss to everyone else seems somehow righteous to them. They are the special ones, deserving of their good fortune & position in life, and everyone should admire them too, or at least admit how wonderfully opportune they are. How this self-serving self-interest impacts the rest of us is manifold, but the most concerning is these people's sincere believe in an upcoming economic collapse, which in itself is not an evil thing except that their concern is only about their personal loss of wealth & that of the people they know & admire, which are other 1%ers. They self-righteously condemn "government" for causing the problem with no introspection of the real reason, which is that they have hoarded America's opportunity, leaving a large majority of the population disaffected & dissatisfied. They SHOULD be worried about is what the majority will do to their tiny minority if the situation gets any worse.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-25_387_financial_hubris.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-25_387_financial_hubris.mp3 2:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash financial hubris, politics, humor no Wed, 28 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Rational thought in financial matters is probably the third of forth thing influencing people's decisions. First & foremost is the search for higher status; what other people think of you has more impact on your success than any single factor, and certainly influences what you think of yourself. This distorts the decision-making process, allowing completely erroneous & illogical ideas to dominate society. For example, there are all kinds of reasons stated why you need to personally interview for a job, or why you need references, or what college you attended, but the real reason is to see if you're admirable enough to be somebody the others want to work with. There will be dozens of people interviewing for plumb jobs; the thing that sets the winner apart is the label on their suit, their beauty & the prestige of the school they went to. Anyone carrying a Gucci bag, even a fake Gucci, has more credibility than anyone who doesn't because the Number One Goal is status, and outward displays of your exquisite taste indicates you deserve it: respectwise, influencewise, and leadershipwise. You are what you wear.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-25_386_gucci_theory_of_success.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-25_386_gucci_theory_of_success.mp3 2:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash status, politics, humor no Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The concept of future money is completely misunderstood, let's review: Saving money is an attempt to predict the future. Investment is a smokescreen the Nouveau Aristocracy use to justify their vast accumulation of wealth. Stocks are the contrivance clever people use to fleece gullible people. Retirement is an After-Life Rewards myth but in real life. Small Business is precious, and should be treated that way. Big Business is the very essence of The Rich being subsidized by everyone else. Insurance is the perverse incentive for things to go badly. Small Business is most vulnerable to the rapacious liability industry. Socialized Liability would provide security for all, lessen the fear of losing everything, and muzzle the legal jackals. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-25_385_savings_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-25_385_savings_concepts.mp3 2:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash savings concepts, politics, humor no Sat, 24 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liability must change dramatically. This country would be much better off if "liability"' became a Government function, where everyone who truly needed help got it, not just those lucky few who happened to get injured by someone with money. As it stands now, it's "jackpot justice," benefiting the legal profession rather than fulfilling the intended purpose of making the injured whole. Even if the situation is examined from an ethical perspective, how injuries occur should NOT be part of the equation. In fact, injuries are far more likely to come from unfortunate events than from the actions of people, but should not all injuries be redressed equally? The biggest irony of today's liability system is that those who are injured are victims a second time if the perpetrator has no assets because now they're also responsible for the costs of their injury. If the goal of liability is to recompense the victims then that goal is not being achieved, out the window goes fairness and all we're left with is cynical profiteering, plus the exploitation, hubris, self-righteousness, and shear extortion of the liability industry. Blame and accusations are unhealthy, and retribution is a poor reason to compromise society. There is no need for greedy claims of punitive damages so that attorneys can get rich. If someone's actions cause or threaten to cause civil harm, they should pay a fine into a General Liability Pool, and if their actions are criminal, they should face judicial punishment. Universal healthcare would provide comfort and maintenance to those who are physically or emotionally injured, and the General Liability Pool would provide funds to alleviate property or business damage. Socialized liability not only makes practical sense, society is a less contentious, more reassuring place.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-23_384_socialized_liability.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-23_384_socialized_liability.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialized liability, liability, politics, humor no Thu, 22 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liability is a devil's bargain between attorneys and insurance companies. Big business is protected from liability through a legal technique called"securitization," where the shell companies exposed to liability have no seizable assets. Mom & Pop businesses are the only ones still liable because they don't make enough to protect themselves through similar means. Everything they built up is taken, or so burdened by insurance that the insurance companies get all the profit. Libertarians use the excuse that liability is preferable to regulations. Regulations can be captured, they say, but liability is even more open to exploitation, especially by money. With regulations, everyone is playing by the same rules, there is no subjectivity, human emotion, and greed does not dominate the resolution. Conscientious behavior is adequate protection in the objective environment of regulation, whereas liability can strike at any moment, on a whim, a chance, a gamble you didn't intend to make. Of course, those with the financial resources & legal acumen can shield themselves from liability, no matter how egregious. The intricacies of liability offer a way for them to shift responsibility to those less capable of deflection, where a regulation would have prohibited their action in the first place. Liability is another technique for The Rich to get richer at the expense of everyone else.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-23_383_business_liability.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-23_383_business_liability.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liability, politics, humor no Tue, 20 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The insidious invasion of insurance into every aspect of our lives is what makes Insurance companies the most profitable big business in the world. The combination of usurious insurance costs, perverse incentivized liability, and our sanctimonious Blame Culture has distorted the concept of responsibility into something unrecognizable. Most people simply expect that any catastrophe in their life will be covered by insurance, which is doubly attractive, because if you benefit every time something goes wrong, you get both the illusion of security plus the perverse sense of anticipation that the next slip on the sidewalk or car accident that will pay for your kid's college education. And as the power & influence of insurance companies has increased, so has shifting of blame onto institutions: business, education & government; because that's where the money is. Institutions also provide a mask that allows individuals to escape personal responsibility so people working at those institutions who don't have to pay insurance premiums directly, want lots of it, feeding the beast. Insurance, by exploiting the conniving aspect of human nature, has become an enormous parasite sucking the life out of innovation & self-reliance. Worse, if enough people needed to collect, the insurance companies would collapse like the House of Cards they are.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-22_382_insurance.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-22_382_insurance.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash insurance, politics, humor no Sun, 18 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy If small businesses mostly fail because their profit margins are so limited, how can gigantic corporations manage double-digit returns year-after-year? Unfortunately, the answers are almost universally detrimental to the Free Market: monopoly, regulatory capture, patent exploitation, usury, legal obfuscation & campaign donations. Anybody so-called investing in Big Business stocks is little more than gambling that the business can retain its uncompetitive advantages. As for society's needs: the people that run Big Business are not answerable to public censor, and no one is personally held accountable for what would in private circumstances be crimes. Government-imposed fines only penalize the pension funds that invest in the business. The largest stockholders are often Hedge funds that know or care little more about the business than how vulnerable their stock is to being leveraged. Stockholders are not protected from voracious management salaries set by crony Boards of Directors. Their tax structure subsidizes the richest shareholders, and most shareholders have absolutely no say as to how their money is used, whether they receive dividends, or even if they can ever get their money back. All-in-all, the bigger the business is, the worse it is for every other business, the ones that actually create jobs & respond to normal Market Forces. In the battle between Big & Small Business, it's obvious who won the cash cow, and who takes home the booby prize.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-22_381_big_business.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-22_381_big_business.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash big business, politics, humor no Fri, 16 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Most people start their small business using their savings, retirement, a mortgage, or inheritance, based on naive optimism that almost always results in failure, yet it's vitally important to the American mystique: working long hours for little pay and no benefits simply out of the belief that you're the one who's going to make it. Many small business owners even have their wife and kids helping out, no pay. Then there’s the indignity of hiring someone ,who is protected from long hours, and provided social security, healthcare and guaranteed minimum wage by you. As employee benefits go up: childcare leave, unemployment insurance, workplace rules, etc., being the one responsible for all that stuff, especially when you don't have those guarantees yourself, just isn’t worth it. If small business is really the job engine in America then the people who create them should not be penalized for their ambition, work ethic & fortitude. However, if there was a place to "invest" your money, even with all these things working against you, a small business is the most productive utilization as far as society is concerned, and, hey, you still have a chance of making it work.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-21_380_small_business.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-21_380_small_business.mp3 2:04 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash small business, politics, humor no Wed, 14 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It doesn't take much predicting the future to know the future of money saved for retirement; there isn't going to be any. Before anybody raising kids today can retire, whatever they have saved will be gone. Most of it's gone already, you just don't know it yet. Retirement funds operate on the assumption that they get some kind of return, 4 or 5% at least, some need double digit returns just to meet their current obligations. That's simply not possible in today's less than 1% interest climate, so fund managers are forced to put the money in the Stock Market, but the Stock Market is a Zero-sum game: somebody wins, somebody loses. All of those people you hear about making big money in the Stock Market, it's got to be coming from somewhere: the $24 trillion in supposed retirement funds is where. Retirement funds really only exist on paper, the money's been lost, it just hasn't showed up in the accounting because nobody is watching too closely since they won't be getting it for decades. There's lots of chicanery: all future retirees know is the yearly balance sheet that comes in the mail telling them how much their imaginary nest egg is imaginarily increasing. A quarter century from now when people really want the money, it won't be there; it's a Ponzi scheme that depends on young Workers paying into the system. The solution, if there is any, will take both inflation & fund bankruptcy.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-21_379_retirement.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-21_379_retirement.mp3 2:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash retirement, politics, humor no Mon, 12 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The very idea of stocks relies entirely on faith; faith that the stock you're buying is worth anything, faith that the company you're investing in will operate profitably & faith that somebody will give your money back if you ask for it. That's religious levels of faith, but you're a lot more committed to stocks than you ever have to be to a religion, and religion has the strength of unknowingness, no one can actually say your religion is a crock, but stocks don't have similar uncertainty; we can see that stocks are bogus. Quick lesson #1: stocks are predicting the future. Lesson #2: most companies fail. You don't need anymore lessons than that. At their basest level, even the idea of buying a stock doesn't make sense: a majority of stocks have a PE ratio over 25; that means it would take 25 years of profits just to pay your investment off, let alone make any money. Does that sound even halfway reasonable to you? And most stocks pay no dividends, Growth stocks, stocks you buy because you're betting they will go up for mysterious reasons; that's gambling in the purest sense. For example, after a decade, Amazon just started turning a profit once they cornered the market by losing money until the competition, like Sears, went belly-up. Anti-monopoly laws were supposed to prevent that kind of thing. It's only possible when a small group of people have an unimaginable amount of money available to make even more money. In fact, almost the entire tech market is hot-air; schemes to fleece Retirement Funds, and siphon back the dollars other countries have accumulated through unbalanced trade. Stocks are a huge clock-ticking Ponzi scheme.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-19_378_stocks.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-19_378_stocks.mp3 2:41 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash stocks, politics, humor no Sat, 10 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Often the argument given for tax breaks is investment, and that word has taken on mystical connotations, so-much-so that conniving politicians call The Rich “Job Creators,” inferring the super rich are important to a society's well-being. The Rich then use that excuse so they can accumulate even more wealth, and because their vast accumulations would seem obscene otherwise. But the concept is flawed on two fronts: first, that being rich makes one essential to everyone else; that's easily the most topsy-turvy cynical excuse for the stratification of society. And second; that money somehow comes from rich people. It's unfortunate that the concentration of wealth is so skewed that regular people are under the misconception that The Rich are supernatural. The Rich can supply investment in the form of cash because they have so much of it, but we as a nation certainly do not require The Rich to invest. Most money is in the form of a loan from your bank, which ultimately originates from Government. There are more than enough entrepreneurs who would use that and sweat equity to build businesses. Investment is a deal between Government & The People.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-19_377_investment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-19_377_investment.mp3 2:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash investment, politics, humor no Thu, 08 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Savings is something Monetarists praise. It fits into their conservative narrative of home budgets & conscientious behavior. It's a dogma taken on faith, never examined because accepting that savings is bad for an economy would make whole careers & reputations worthless. However, on-the-flip-side, Keynesianists, believers in fiscal policy, the imaginary money often called stimulus, pooh-pooh savings. In fact, they have their own insightful phrase for it: the paradox of thrift. Basically, one person's savings is another person's hard times. The veneration of savings is due to positive preconceptions held by regular people, something they gleaned from their Protestant Work Ethic parents, Boy Scouts or an over-zealous economics teacher. In reality, saving money has no intrinsic or extrinsic value except as insurance, or in anticipation of a purchase, and only relatively small amounts are needed for either, not millions of dollars & certainly NOT $100s of millions. You would be better off using your money to make your life better or more entertaining, because just accumulating money as a matter of keeping score is literally self-embezzlement. Saving money is mostly a form of predicting the future, and no one can do that, regardless of the assurances they give you of the quality of your future Nursing Home.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-17_376_savings.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-17_376_savings.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash savings, monetarism, Keynesianism, politics, humor no Tue, 06 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Everybody wants more money, let's review how they expect to get it: Basic Income is the idea that no one has to work if they don't want to. Everyone is expecting someone else to pay for Basic Income. Forcefully taking from someone to give to another is the essence of socialism. People have to be indoctrinated to work. It's disingenuous to claim that higher wages will not impact the number of jobs. Only Markets can determine what a job is worth. Seniority pay puts the lie to the concept of same-pay-for-same-work. Tipping is social extortion. Robot workers allow you to have more & spend less time getting it. A sustainable lifestyle doesn't have to be meager but it does have to be cheap. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-17_375_basic_income_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-17_375_basic_income_concepts.mp3 2:10 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Basic Income, politics, humor no Sun, 04 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Once the robots have all the jobs, and all the superfluous people are on Basic Income to survive, working only two hours a day, surfing, smoking dope & “doing something meaningful,” what are the basics they need to survive? Cheap staples like clothes, food, healthcare & housing, maybe a cubical or pod living which included utilities, like Japanese tube hotels. Next, a public data plan because smart phones will become the most important thing in modern life. After that, self-driving public transportation, sports & entertainment. Families, however those are composed, would have additional requirements. That would probably do it, and in reality, it's not that much of a stretch, certainly something that could be solved after a decade of concerted effort by engineers & sincere politicians. If you wanted a little more than that, you would have to work additional hours, and if you wanted to live in the suburbs & drive your own foreign automobile, that would take a full-time job, making you one of the people who keep the robot utopia going.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-17_374_sustainable_lifestyle.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-17_374_sustainable_lifestyle.mp3 1:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash robots, utopia, politics, humor no Fri, 02 Mar 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy For all the mystery, curiosity & appeal of androids, human-appearing robots that could do most work that people do now, the secondary thought that soon pops into most people's minds is: if robots are doing all the work, what are people going to do? The sheer amount of time consumed worrying about such flights-of-fantasy is amazing in its own right, and the fact that the simple answer is not widely known means that either no one is listening, or no one has thought it through. Here, let me: In a robot future, where most overtly productive tasks like picking strawberries, driving cars & even designing iPhones, is done by machines, the “jobs” that people do will concentrate into the one thing people are eager to pay for: additional status. Owning & doing things that are fashionable will always be part of consumption, and participating in social trends & seeking public approval will never be something done by robots, because people don't want the accolades of things, they want the applause of other people. Plus, you are not going to drink a beer with an android: there will always be a person telling you a funny story of their day's happenings. If the only job people had was following around a robot dabbing oil into its joints, then used the money they earned to buy the cheap goods produced by the robots, with anything left over going to pay their yoga dues & support Greenpeace, there's work & fulfillment enough for everybody, no matter how many robots change the baby's diaper.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-03-01_373_robot_workers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2018-03-01_373_robot_workers.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash robot workers, politics, humor no Thu, 01 Mar 2018 09:14:37 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Few topics are outrageous & sanctimonious at the same time, but any discussion of tipping certainly is. The idea that there is undeclared additional expense on a purchase is not only championed by every Living Wage scold, but also contrary to Contract law. It's certainly counter egalitarian, not to mention the tax issues. To think that the person with direct customer access can exploit that position, while other more important contributors to the enterprise suck wind, is absolutely stunning. And the public guilt aspect, self-interested moralizing, shrill superiority, appeal to charity, and demand on customer courtesy moves tipping into its own realm of unpleasantness. The odiousness of the practice actually makes the food taste worse. Tipping is also a way for The Wealthy to flaunt their disdain for money, and publicly display their largess towards The Little People, then the rest of us get dragged into their perverse orbit, and end up competing among ourselves for who gave away the most money for the least amount of effort. I don't go anywhere that requires tipping. In fact, if I see a "Tip Jar" on the counter, I put my merchandise down & go somewhere else. Tipping is something America does but is nowhere else in the world. What makes it doubly-obscene is that foreign waitstaff expect only Americans to tip. Luckily, in the Pacific Northwest at least, it's becoming fashionable for restaurant chains to switch to higher prices, higher wages for everyone, and no tipping.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-15_372_tipping.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-15_372_tipping.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash tipping, politics, humor no Mon, 26 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy I grew up with the seniority system, where someone, usually older, was paid more than me but we were ranked together, and did the same work. This is actually considered unethical by accountants, but the irony is, hypocrisy really, of the feminist slogan, equal-pay-for-equal-work, is that it doesn't include the most egregious example of unequal pay, seniority-based pay, because men are affected by seniority just as much as women, and it's a favorite of unions, feminist's political allies. To justify the illogical concept of seniority, there's the old canard that people who have been at a job longer are more valuable for reasons that are both subjective & cynical. In fact, there are several reasons that tenure on a job is a negative thing, complacency being the worst but inefficiency ranks right up there too. Seniority-based pay is simply another Gate-keeper tactic that gives advantage to those who got there first, an exploitation of power that crosses ideological boundaries. Seniority is not only untouchable, you can't even talk about the inequity at the office or you can be fired... Unless you're a woman.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-13_371_seniority.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-13_371_seniority.mp3 2:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash seniority, politics, humor no Sat, 24 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There is no proper compensation. Who's to say what a job is worth? The biased business owners? The biased people who do the job? Someone-who-knows-better-n-you? How much is a High School graduate with good dexterity skills worth per hour? How much is it worth to pick trash off of the street in front of the park, or wash dirty dishes? Markets & wages can't be controlled, and they can't be predicted, and trying to do so causes unintended consequences. If it's too expensive, just leave the trash or use throw away utensils. Raising the price of mundane but important things only causes those things not to get done. All the people who could be doing those things, all 100 million Americans who do nothing, will continue to do nothing, except take free money from the State to stay alive. Employers aren't your nanny. They certainly aren't responsible if you can pay for your housing, cell phone, transportation & children. If society wants you to have those things, SOCIETY should provide them. Let the Market determine wages, and fill in the gap through the Social Safety Net. That's what we do now, and we should expand it so that everyone can have a job. It's society's responsibility to make up the difference between the “Living Wage” society wants & what employers are willing to pay. It would also encourage Work Ethic & take the pressure off sending jobs overseas.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-13_370_what_are_jobs_worth.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-13_370_what_are_jobs_worth.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash jobs, living wage, politics, humor no Thu, 22 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Emergent Order, self-organization, Market Forces, and all the other ways to describe Chaos Theory, is the only way to model complex systems. There's plenty of evidence that this is the case in physics & in economics. Salaries are a prime example of a complex system: there is no way we can predict the impact of a Minimum Wage, but it goes against logic to think that the only thing that defies Market Forces is wages, that if an employee costs more it has no effect on jobs? Yet Minimum Wage promoters assume that there is no connection between wages & jobs, and they use all kinds of Collectivist claptrap to support their arguments, making it an issue between supporters of Capitalism, and hence, liberty vs. Socialism, just like what most nonsensical debates usually boil down to. You can't force customers to pay more than a service is worth to them. It's also ridiculous to think that if a job isn't worth paying a Living Wage, it's not worth doing, or that employees have a Right to an income but owners don't. And who doesn't recognize that Minimum Wage is another factor driving jobs out of the country. Scrap that whole concept of Minimum-Living Wage & instead partially implement "Basic Income," welfare but only if you work. The employer pays the Market Forces value of the job & society makes up the difference. However, among the possibilities of doing nothing verses Minimum Wage, it's better to do nothing than to exacerbate the Jobs problem.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-01_369_against_minimum_wage.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-01_369_against_minimum_wage.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Minimum Wage, Living Wage, politics, humor no Tue, 20 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy It seems obvious that people who agree to start a society share some kind of universal Work Ethic because how long can any society exist that consumes more than it produces? A person who needs money must do something to earn it. Any job is better than no job but forcing people to dig-holes-fill-them-in-again would backfire, we must create jobs that serve the dual-purpose of having an end-goal, as well as activity, and a job might consist of learning, or some other kind of self-improvement that would eventually benefit society. Unfortunately, people can make excuses to themselves about why they shouldn't have to work. In reality, nobody needs 10 shirts & 4 TV sets, so if they voluntarily choose to have only 5 shirts & 2 TV sets, they confuse that lack of consumption with production, and assume their responsibility to society is fulfilled. America has an entire generation who are under this misconception, so-much-so that they advocate a Basic Income that means they never have to work if they simply cut back on consuming. They insist that "corporations" are doing enough production for everyone. Unless Work Ethic is instilled in upcoming generations, the connection between it & society's fundamental viability is blurred as more-n-more people assume someone else will be productive and then be forced to share. Consequently, it's in a society's essential interests to indoctrinate its new members with the concept of working: if every young person had to pick a bushel of cotton before they could connect to wifi, the problem would be solved.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-11_368_its_better_to_work_than_lounge.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-11_368_its_better_to_work_than_lounge.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash work ethic, basic income, politics, humor no Sun, 18 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Basic Income is the idea that everyone should get enough money to live on so they can pursue what they want in life without having to work for it: a Right to free money. Money comes from taxes or government prints it. If it's simply newly printed money then it doesn't necessarily violate anybody's liberty, but I can't see that lasting for long: a $trillion a year with nothing in return is probably hyper-inflationary? However, it seems more likely that Basic Income would come from some kind of taxes. Many advocates of Basic Income insist it's not socialism but then who's against it? Certainly not the socialists. Let me see, who would be against a Basic Income? Hey, it might be the people OBLIGATED to pay it. And why do they have to pay it? Well, because even though it's bad for them personally, it's good for everybody; the idea that the needs of the group supersede the wants of the individual, which is socialism, the opposite of liberty.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-09_367_basic_income_is_socialistic.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-09_367_basic_income_is_socialistic.mp3 1:53 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash basic income, socialism, socialistic, politics, humor no Fri, 16 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Basic Income is redistribution of wealth, which is a good thing, and the receivers of Basic Income, everybody presumably, are the correct recipients of the largess, but the question remains: who is providing the money? The most common strategy is that all other forms of Welfare would be discontinued with Basic Income taking its place, but most people don't receive Welfare but would receive Basic Income. Certainly that idea is incongruent with math. Basic Income is going to need a huge new source of revenue. Would the additional money needed come from The Rich in the form of steeply increased Income Taxes? But there are proponents of Basic Income who are simultaneously against Inheritance & Income Tax. The dichotomy of logic exhibited by these people has no explanation other than deep subliminal self-interest: they want Free Money but don't want to contribute any themselves. Another plan is to tax machines. What? Machines have no money, and are they talking about my wristwatch & every other technological labor-saving device? Because that's what it would take to get the kind of money we're talking about. There aren't going to be armies of robots whose job is to pay taxes; only people pay taxes. Essentially, everybody would be taxed on everything so the Basic Incomers don't have to work. They want to take from people who plan for the future, to give to those who don't.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-11_366_who_pays_for_basic_income.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-11_366_who_pays_for_basic_income.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash basic income, politics, humor no Wed, 14 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Basic Income is the idea that everyone pays everyone else to set home doing nothing. It's the perpetual motion machine of politics coming to life through democracy, for as long as it lasts anyway... Even the most basic questions about Basic Income generate basic questions: Who decides how much? Do people with more needs get more, for example, people who live in more expensive areas? Do wealthy people get it? Do people who don't need it because they live conscientious & frugal lives but would technically be considered “poor” get it? Is there charity on top of Basic Income, for example, if someone blows their monthly income on partying & raucous living, with nothing left over for housing, food & medicine? If I have more than I need & someone else has less, am I obligated to give them my excess? The very idea of Basic Income is antithetical to liberty, the concept that people reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of their own actions, because Basic Income rewards people for inaction. Proponents make the argument that liberty requires opportunity & Basic Income provides opportunity, but they are ignoring the consequences to other people, the second most basic tenet of liberty: you are free to do as you please as long as it doesn't affect the liberty of others. They also argue that if a majority of people want it then that overrules individual liberty, but that violates the allies aspect of liberty: if someone else must be enslaved to perpetuate your liberty, that is a tenuous contract indeed. Liberty is higher on the importance scale than democracy: there are other ways of making decisions but liberty is a fragile flame, easily extinguished.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-09_365_basic_income.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-09_365_basic_income.mp3 2:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash basic income, politics, humor no Mon, 12 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy No topic causes more conflict than religion, let's review: The intelligence that is paying attention to everything you do, that's you. Science is the opposite of faith. Religion is subjective, and so is calling something a religion. There are no public morals, only people who want there to be. Enforced morality is an attempt to gain control. A public business cannot pick & choose who its customers are going to be. Puritanism is an attempt to combat people's preference of play over work. Polygamy would provide more opportunity for close relationships. Ribosomes are the proof that evolution should not be accepted as the only possibility. The value of human life is subjective & mutable. Society must resist the urge to elevate animals into the concept of Rights. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-07_364_religious_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-07_364_religious_concepts.mp3 2:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash religion, politics, humor no Sat, 10 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The debate often rages on whether animals have souls, or that farm animals are anything more than food. I like my dog, but I like my iPhone better. Animals are robots, programmed by some unknown mechanism called instinct, but personalities that can be easily reproduced by a computer program. If you are of the opinion that the Turing Challenge will soon be accomplished, thinking the voice on the other end of the phone is a real person, not an AI, then how can you not believe that a chicken can't be represented by computer now? Certainly cats can be simulated, and a dog would take hardly more consideration; even primates wouldn't be much of a problem. That flesh and blood creature you love for its individuality is just a Packard that poops, but people still think their dog is special, that nothing can replace Bootsie. It's an easily explained phenomenon; humans naturally anthropomorphize animals & even objects: we see cats smiles & happy faces on automobile grills. Animals have intelligence enough to survive, and we extrapolate that to fit human expectations, and even apply human moral strictures, mostly subconsciously, especially those people that have no contact with animals outside of storybooks & the zoo. In the evolutionary scheme of things, where companionship & husbandry is a survival mechanism, feeling protective of animals is a perfectly reasonable point of view; almost everybody does it, but mass psychosis doesn't make imaginary things any more real.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-07_363_animals_are_organic_robots.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-07_363_animals_are_organic_robots.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash organic robots, politics, humor no Thu, 08 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Sanctimonious posturing gets in the way of many debates, often totally obscuring whatever valid points are trying to be made. The worst of the worst of these conversation-killers is invoking the “saves lives” trope. Anyone need only to look around them to see that lives, even children's lives, are subject to other priorities; riding in cars, for example, kills 10s of thousands of people a year, but we still drive; food poisoning kills thousands, but we still eat; and drowning in the bathtub kills more people than gun accidents. Even in popular culture, we send young people off to war, participate in extreme sports, and do dangerous jobs for money. In a priority list of things, human life may not be in the Top 10? Even things, animals & concepts are often more important than human life. I value a fully-restored 1958 Packard more than I value a random human from somewhere poor & far away, and so does everyone with two cars or a Season's Ski Pass. A single Black Rhino is worth thousands of Syrian refugees drowning in capsized boats, and one of the most revered quotes in American history is "Give me liberty or give me death."   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-07_362_the_value_of_human_life.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-07_362_the_value_of_human_life.mp3 2:06 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash human life, politics, humor no Tue, 06 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy A living cell perfectly fits the definition of being a von Neumann Machine, the kind of computer we use today, including I/O & memory. For example; the CPU is the ribosome, the ROM is DNA, hormones are input, and the RAM is a number of things: methylation, proliferation, promoters. Ribosomes take the DNA as a sequential input which they process according to their 3-bit instruction set, codons in cells, to produce a sequential output called proteins, which is what your body is made of. The most famous protein is hemoglobin; blood. The odds of hemoglobin evolving to hold oxygen in just the way our body needs it is 20 to the 140th power, which is a BIG number; way, way, way bigger than the number of seconds since life began on Earth, but if you include the ~100,000 proteins in the human body that had to develop simultaneously & work in concert with one another, that number is so astronomically large that it exceeds the number of atoms in the galaxy. With odds like that, evolution requires faith to believe because otherwise it would be miraculous, and science doesn't rely on miracles. Evolution is mostly science but when it strays into faith, it becomes a religion. Now you too can be skeptical about evolution without being a Creationist.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-05_361_ribosomes_vs_evolution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-05_361_ribosomes_vs_evolution.mp3 2:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash evolution, ribosome, politics, humor no Sun, 04 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Polygamy works many ways: one woman-multiple guys, all guys, all women, or any combination. Anybody can live in a polygamous relationship but heaven forbid they want to be recognized by our government. Prohibition of polygamy comes from preconceptions in religion, customs & tradition. Whatever practical reasons there are against polygamy, there's no reason to outlaw it, people can make the choice for themselves. I'm descended from Mormon polygamy, but my wife would never put up with another wife, and I wouldn't accept with another husband, but that's only our opinions, different strokes for different folks. The positive aspects of polygamy are rarely voiced: people need routine in their lives for mental health reasons, and companionship, in whatever form, accomplishes that. Society is benefited by people pairing up in whatever fashion that may be, including polygamy, and we have a glut of single people for which polygamy may be the solution. The restriction on polygamy is motivated more by politics than anything practical, a stricture of leftover dogma, in the realm of morals; any small practical State benefit not worth conflicting with people's individual liberty.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-05_360_polygamy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-05_360_polygamy.mp3 2:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash polygamy, politics, humor no Fri, 02 Feb 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Puritanism is best described by H.L. Mencken's famous quote, "The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy." However, Puritanism did give rise to modern industrialization: they were a discriminated against Christian denomination in England that gravitated towards science & education. Since then, Puritanism has come to represent all moral-based forms of government that tend to issue from the twin motives of vindictive behavior, envy & resentment, masked in conscientiousness. The result of unhappy people in positions of authority, condemning joy in others. Liberty would prevent this but, of course, Puritan-thinking communities are Totalitarian in nature, top-down control by people who claim they know better-n-you. Ironically, another puritanical society, the Shakers, eschewed sexual intercourse: nothing is more detrimental to society than not perpetuating itself. Needless to say, Shakers no longer exist. Other anti-liberty concepts have also arisen in the Puritan mold, based on so-called morals, which are no less oppressive. A modern example is Political Correctness, which is essentially the same thing as puritanism without the God connection. Generally speaking, anytime someone else is telling you how to think & act, those are the Puritans.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-05_359_puritanism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-05_359_puritanism.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Puritianism, politics, humor no Wed, 31 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Liberty is constrained by three things: opportunity, impinging on the liberty of others, and the need for allies. Part of living peacefully with other people is the implied Treaty we have with them, most important of which is showing them respect in public, whether or not you respect them in private. In public the rules of liberty are very strict, especially in the market: you, the vendor, can sell what you want; you can choose what you market, but you can't discriminate who you market to. In a public market, it's not up to vendors who their customers are. If a meat-eater comes into a vegan restaurant and orders a steak, you can say "we only serve vegan food," but you can't say, "we don't serve carnivores." That's the Liberty Agreement we all live by: I will treat you respectfully in public, and visa versa. If you want some self-righteous food discrimination, go eat at your church. The most famous example of this vendor discrimination attitude is making Wedding cakes for gay couples: your business may be to bake cakes, but it's no business of yours who buys them. Similarly, there's nothing a vendor can do to stop selling cupcakes to pedophiles; nor people who commit domestic violence; or even speed a lot. The decision is not up to a private party in a public market about who they sell to. Conversely, though technically legal, if you don't shop in a store because the owner, or somebody who works there, or the shoeshine boy out front, has a problem with homosexuals, then it's you, the customer, who are violating the social contract.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-04_358_selling_cupcakes_to_pedophiles.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-04_358_selling_cupcakes_to_pedophiles.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash gay wedding cake, politics, humor no Mon, 29 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy In a liberty society where everyone has to show at least outward respect to the other people around them, if someone or some group is acting in a manner that abuses our sensibilities or feelings of appropriateness or righteousness, what can we do to discourage such behavior? What is the Line? Can we disrupt their life in any way we see possible, or is it just their livelihood we can threaten? Can we form a picket-line in front of the stores they own, or can we also cyberstalk them? Can we follow their kids home from school? Though most of us can reflexively answer “no” to those questions, there are people who insist their moral judgment takes precedence. Also, it's impossible to tell the difference between people who think they are doing society a favor, and those who support such behavior out of envy, perversity & spite. In the battle to maintain our liberty, we must voluntarily restrict moral sanctions in a public space. Liberty always comes first, and it's only possible when everyone else is our ally. Our public treaty is that whatever you think of me, when we interact in a public space, we will be respectful of one another.     Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-04_357_moral_sanctions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-04_357_moral_sanctions.mp3 2:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash morals, sanctions, politics, humor no Sat, 27 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Who determines public morals? What must we all do to"save children's lives, "keep God in the classroom," "eat healthy," "prevent discrimination," or whatever. Some States burden cigarettes & alcohol with high taxes, others outlaw gambling & fireworks. Making abortion difficult is high on the list, and Sanctuary Cities are another way of virtue signaling. We penalize groups of people to empower others based on the past. There are also those that insist on being addressed in a particular manner, or demand special treatment due to some hardship. The Left, who by definition do not place liberty first, want to subjugate speech & expression to the sensibilities of what others think. Because morals are subjective, we undermine America's legitimacy by forcing them on others. The hypocrisy of enforced morals will also come back on us as irony. How is forcing people to attend prayer at public gatherings different than subjecting everyone to a loud Call-to-Prayer five times a day? How is pan-handling on the sidewalk different than Girl Scouts selling cookies in front of Safeway? From a personal liberty perspective, when the actions of some exploit the sensibilities of everyone else, that's when the line gets crossed. I neither want to give "a moment of silence" nor listen to some godawful wailing at 3 in the morning. If you want to feel good by supporting someone's addiction, great, do it someplace private. The arguments for any kind of public morals are always sanctimonious, aggressive & illogical, and perverse people get the additional benefit of irritating others. In a perfect liberty world, morals would never cross into the public space.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-03_356_public_morals.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-03_356_public_morals.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash public morals, morals, politics, humor no Thu, 25 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy No one knows better-n-me about what I believe, and The Courts can't tell me otherwise. Unfortunately, in April 2016, a federal judge ruled against my religion, The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, aka Pastafarianism, which is a legally recognized religion in Poland, The Netherlands & New Zealand. Among its tenets is that a midget was the first human created. As a youth, I believed in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, aka Mormons, which IS a legally recognized religion. Like if the angel Moroni gave a charlatan some gold plates on a hillside in New York, and who's to say he didn't, just because there's a midget involved in my religion doesn't mean I don't sincerely believe it, who's to say I don't? People can claim they're female even though they have a penis, and demand that they be addressed as “Her Highness,” why can't my midget wear a colander on his head in his Driver's license photo? L. Ron Hubbard openly admitted that he could create a religion from a science-fiction book, hence, Scientology. Catholics indoctrinate children against birth control, Islamists want to cut off their daughter's clitoris, Jews insist God gave them other people's land in the Middle East. Claiming some outlandish liberty-violating practice because of religion must be stopped, and the best way is to leverage it using Jediism, Scientology, FSM, Rastafarianism or whatever, to take out the special treatment "established" religions get. Frankly, I don't know why Pastafarians were discriminated against, we have our own Wikipage & everything?   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-03_355_can_court_determine_valid_religions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-03_355_can_court_determine_valid_religions.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Flying Spagetti Monster, Pastafarianism, religion, politics, humor no Tue, 23 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Back-in-the-day, in the initial stages of the formation of our country, science took a back seat to faith, and the supposed Separation of Church & State in America was intended to allow religious freedom so that particular sects could infect their young with their unique brand of magical thinking without interference from facts. The whole science verses faith debate is fascinating because the two concepts are, in fact, the exact opposite of one another: one is primarily objectivity, while the other is entirely subjective; one requires flexibility of belief, the other requires rigidity; one removes the bonds of human ignorance, the other encourages it; one requires outward thinking, the other inward. When life was a hellhole, at least that's how it seems to those of us in the future, with no opportunity for learning or advancement, before liberty became the recognized goal, faith was probably important because there was nothing else. Faith soothed mental health and was therefore important to society. Science has a tendency to dispell myth, magic & propaganda, so it's understandable why the Faith people distrust science; it tears at the very foundation of their beliefs; beliefs that are only possible because they were instilled through indoctrination; most people are rational if they don't go into a situation already harboring erroneous preconceptions. But it's not just religious people who indulge faith at the expense of science; unfortunately, collectivist totalitarian thought is making a re-emergence in the Western World, and since science is a competitor of propaganda, it's on the defensive so faith is rushing in to take its place.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-03_354_science_vs_faith.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-03_354_science_vs_faith.mp3 2:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash faith, science, politics, humor no Sun, 21 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy People like company. It's a rare individual that embraces loneliness, most of us want to talk about ourselves to someone; nothing is more interesting to yourself than you. Close friends to whom you can divulge all aspects of your inner life to are too infrequent for the endless stream of consciousness that you would like to share, hence, your psyche invents an invisible friend that pays attention to everything you do. This natural phenomenon often gets explained as something spiritual, people insisting they feel someone is watching their every action & thought, and there is, but it's themselves. Adam Smith called this phenomenon “the observer," and discussed it in-depth in his 18th-Century book, The Theory of Moral Sentiments. There need be no other mystical explanation; no god who is personally interested in you; there is only you, and you are watching & judging, constantly comparing your circumstances & actions against the morals & values that were vested in you by your parents & society. You judge yourself yet think judgment is coming from on-high. This is the source of shame as well as pride; this is the source of chagrin & exultation; this is where comfort & love come from. Having a friend who knows everything about you, and who you can discuss things with privately, is worth any price, yet it's free, because that person is you.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-03_353_you_watch_over_yourself.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-03_353_you_watch_over_yourself.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash the observer, friend, god, politics, humor no Fri, 19 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Taxes are rife with misconceptions, let's review: Meritocracy is a cover word used by prideful & greedy people to camouflage their luck. The Middle Class must be enlarged at the expense of The Rich. Taxes increase liberty by redistributing opportunity. Regressive taxes subsidize The Rich, while Progressive taxes redistribute wealth to everyone else. Payroll taxes are second only to Sales tax as the most Regressive tax. The Rich ultimately end up with the tax money that is spent by Government. Tax Dodge schemes are better at job creation than any intentional government run program. Tax “loopholes” primarily benefit the Middle Class at the expense of The Rich. The Home Mortgage Deduction is a distinctly Middle Class loophole. Business taxes are another way The Rich have their wealth subsidized. There wouldn't have to be Federal Taxes if people could think-outside-the-box. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-02_352_tax_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-02_352_tax_concepts.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash taxes, politics, humor no Wed, 17 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Under the right circumstances, governments don't have to collect any taxes yet can still continue to spend even more money. This sounds pretty amazing, how come you never hear about it? I wonder about that myself: I think it's because almost everyone conflates economics with accounting, and can't imagine anything other than debits & credits. You do hear how expansion of the economy is a good thing: more jobs, more production, more consumption; so there are people out there who know the secret. It's simple really, here's how it works: consumption must be increasing, combined with a dash of inflation. For example, if consumption is increasing by 5% per year, plus 5% inflation, with a GNP of $12 trillion, those fiscal pressures would require printing $1.2 trillion worth of new money, which happens to be the size of the current U.S. budget, no taxes need be collected. Inflation is the key because it's the most flexible and can offset any softness in consumption. Inflation is also a rough form of wealth redistribution which is good, and it depresses the demand for borrowed money which is also good, but it also depresses consumption, which is a bad thing in this scenario. Also, productivity must be kept equal to consumption or inflation will spiral out of control. Because productivity must be increasing, and productivity comes from investment, rich people get richer. To prevent that from creating an aristocracy, government must redistribute the wealth, which means more spending, which is consumption; the feedback loop is completed and the cycle can continue forever.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-02_351_no_federal_taxes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-02_351_no_federal_taxes.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash federal taxes, taxes, politics, humor no Mon, 15 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Small Business is the bedrock of a Capitalistic society yet over two-thirds fail. They certainly shouldn't have any counterproductive drag imposed by Government: we need Small Business to be encouraged not discouraged. How Government was able to make Ma-n-Pa shops socially responsible for the people who work for them is the worst example of role confusion & evasion. There shouldn't be Payroll taxes on employees, and certainly no taxes at all on the business that employs them. Social welfare spending should come out of Income tax receipts so that the people who end up with all the money are paying the social cost of the people whose backs they climbed over. Collectivists, of which there are an ever-increasing number, disdain Small Business. The Marxist ideal is that Workers own the business, but Ma-n-Pa aren't looking for random partners. One of the main reasons people start their own business is so they can make decisions for themselves & personally benefit from the risks they are taking. They aren't doing it for the people work for them, or for society in general. Ma-n-Pa are not responsible for the alturistic self-delusions & envy of people who don't have the ability or inclination to run a business themselves. Now, if their Small Business makes Ma-n-Pa wealthy, that's when taxes are due.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-02_350_tax_the_rich__not_business.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-02_350_tax_the_rich__not_business.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash small business, business taxes, politics, humor no Sat, 13 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Some people insist your home is not an investment, and should be treated differently, tax-wise, than other investments, that's why you can deduct your home's Property Taxes & Mortgage interest. But what is one person's incentive is another person's “loophole.” Home ownership deductions are seen as loopholes to some because owning a home is not something people in the cities do. In fact, they are actually against the concept of suburban homes, usually for environmental reasons, or because they disdain the traditional lifestyle. Also, the continuing weakness of the Middle Class means many people simply can't afford to buy a house, and can't understand why people who can are paying less taxes. Some special treatment of home owners, like Proposition 13 in California, stop Property taxes from increasing while you own your home, and disabled veterans in some counties don't have to pay Property taxes at all. This works well for retired people but not so well for everyone else because their Property taxes will be at a much higher rate to compensate for those who don't pay. How this really works out is that essentially the younger generation, the one raising children, is transferring wealth to the usually better off older generation. Another problem is that exploitation of the special treatment fuels Real Estate speculation bubbles. Still, on-the-whole, the concept that personal home ownership should be encouraged via the Tax Code is sound, even though the backlash against it by the spiteful, envious & uninformed is predictable.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-01_349_home_mortgage_deduction.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-01_349_home_mortgage_deduction.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash home mortgage deduction, tax loopholes, politics, humor no Thu, 11 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy We have decided, as a society, that we want people to own houses. We want them to send their kids to college, and even go themselves. We want them to save money to retire, reduce their carbon footprint, and take care of their parents who have moved in due to Old Age. We vote, there's a lot of us, and we want it. Contrary to popular misconception, the primary benefit of taxes is to redistribute wealth. Mostly that's Government serving in its role of Largest Consumer, but also implicit redistribution using tax deductions & credits directly targeting activities that society values. However, like anything, loopholes can be exploited: anytime these benefits actually serve to enrich The 1%, they are counter-productive and rightfully despised, but if Ma-n-Pa grocer are getting the benefit, or Aunt Judy goes to college & gets off Welfare, well, that's something we should applaud. The fact is a few rich folks use all kinds of lame, easily disproved excuses on why they shouldn't have to pay taxes on their capital gains, or the oil that they pump from our soil, or their private jets, luxury cars, and the innumerable benefits they receive but don't have to pay taxes for. They have lots of money to run all kinds of tax-avoidance schemes. For example, all those dorks who posit lower tax rates or "flat" taxes by getting rid of "loopholes," never mean the only one that counts: special treatment of Capital Gains. No, they only want the "loopholes" that the Middle Class take, like mortgage interest, education credits, retirement accounts, "green" subsidies, and the other goodies that redistribute from the wealthy to the Middle Class.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-01_348_tax_loopholes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-01_348_tax_loopholes.mp3 2:48 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash tax loopholes, politics, humor no Tue, 09 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy I remember the Tax Dodge schemes of the past when marginal tax rates were high. All kinds of ridiculous, goofy little businesses, like raising lamas, were set up to shelter income. Though obviously unjustifiable on economic grounds, as something interesting, and as employers of various-skilled people, they were optimal ways of building the economy and creating jobs. Sailing colonies? Rural hiking zones? Designer umbrellas? Capella singing competitions? Crazy stuff but these things were just the kind of stimulus that creates new jobs & opportunities. Government could never directly entice some rich guy to manage an ostrich farm that employs half-a-dozen people, but that same guy will work for free, even do dirty work, to finance an enjoyable hobby, or just to keep his hard-earned cash away from “government.” Which is worse: an underground economy, working in the shadows, doing essentially the same thing, or all those newly-employed people proudly claiming to be productive tax-paying citizens? Tax Evasion is putting your money in an Off-shore account & lying about it; Tax Dodging is starting a Classic Airplane restoration club because you like Classic Airplanes, that happens to generate a million dollars worth of payroll. Yeah, the government didn't receive 35% of that money directly from you, but the economy wouldn't have benefited from the other 65% of your million dollars as a stimulus. One man's “Tax Dodge” is another man's career.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-01_347_tax_dodge_schemes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-08-01_347_tax_dodge_schemes.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Tax Dodge, politics, humor no Sun, 07 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The median income in the U.S. is $52K. Average CC debt is $16K, which took about 5 years to accumulate. So, roughly, for every $1 the average American earns, their investing return, so to speak, is -6%. That's NEGATIVE six percent. Now, let's roughly calculate the ROI for the Top 1% of the population: 1% of the population have 40% of America's wealth, and they get $4 trillion of the nation's GNP every year. Since America's wealth is $86 trillion, that means for every $1 The 1% has, their investing return is %12. That's a POSITIVE twelve percent.This means that for every $1 of taxes collected, the average American is returned approximately 94 cents, while the Top 1% get $1.12. There's a lot of numbers here but the bottom line is that the wealthiest people make money due to government spending, like they always make money, which is why they're the Top 1%, and the additional money they make mostly comes from everyone else, not from so-called “growth,” though they get most of that too.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-31_346_how_taxes_make_the_rich_richer.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-31_346_how_taxes_make_the_rich_richer.mp3 1:59 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash taxes, politics, humor no Sun, 07 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy A third of all revenue to Government comes from Payroll taxes, that money Workers have automatically deducted from their paycheck to cover Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment & Injury. In the case of Medicare, money is deducted from every dollar an employee earns, regardless how poor they are, and Social Security isn't much better. What's insane is that workers won't receive any benefit from those payments for multiple decades, compounding their loss immensely. The poorest of the poor Workers are literally being depressed to improve other, probably better well off, people's lives. The scheme is so complicated & surrounded by propaganda that there are actually calls to increase this burden on the people least able to pay it. Worse, Payroll taxes are as big a burden on the business withholding them as the people paying them; the best solution would be to simply eliminate Payroll taxes and provide those benefits out of the General Tax fund. Yes, Income Taxes would go up but poor people are taxed at lower rates with substantial deductions. Also, it would end the bizzare idea that highly paid people get to stop paying Social Security. Even though funding social programs by the people most able to afford it seems eminently reasonable, the people onto whom the burden would be shifted, The Rich, even though they are teeny tiny portion of the population, have completely captured the political process such that democracy is muzzled. Just another example of how The Rich are subsidized by everyone else.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-31_345_payroll_taxes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-31_345_payroll_taxes.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash payroll taxes, politics, humor no Fri, 05 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's be honest, if financial opportunity is the measure of success, America has a LOT more losers than winners. If not for the concept of the “American Dream,” the idea that anyone can rise up to make a fortune from their own effort, the shear numbers of losers, especially in a democracy, would seem to overwhelm the few winners, but our indoctrination is holding, and mostly we don't begrudge rewards for a job well done. However, it's one thing to earn a dollar from the sweat of your brow, and quite another to take that money from people less well off than yourself, but that's exactly what's happening with how things are taxed. In fact, there's a vocabulary that describes this exact concept: REGRESSIVE taxation takes money from all Americans, essentially subsidizing the wealthy. Sales tax is the most common example of regressive taxation because it applies to everyone, even people who earn nothing. Payroll taxes are the absolute worse because only Workers pay them, not The Rich. Capital Gains taxes are actually so regressive that The Rich pay less percentage of their income than the Middle Class. Corporate tax is paid at a high rate regardless of how much money the stockholders have, but The Rich get a deduction. And the most insidious regressive tax idea of all is the so-called “Flat Tax," where everyone is supposed to have the same rate, meaning The Rich will pay less than now, and everyone else will pay more.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-30_344_progressive_vs_regressive_taxation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-30_344_progressive_vs_regressive_taxation.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash regressive, taxation, politics, humor no Wed, 03 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Taxation is a tricky subject because it's so personal & the reasons for taxation are so confused. In a Liberty society, people should benefit from their actions & circumstances, even if it is mostly luck, because virtual lottery tickets are property rights. On the flip side, redistribution of lucky wealth is mandatory to maintain a viable society, though not for the usual reasons claimed by socialists. Liberty requires opportunity, and opportunity is primarily a function of wealth. We shouldn't take money from those who have it out of some misplaced sense of fairness or equality; no, the purpose of taxes is instead to increase the liberty of everyone else, because the most opportunity to the most people provides the most liberty to the most people. The Rich essentially horde opportunity by controlling a huge proportion of the wealth, 40% owned by 1%, with some “trickling down” to the rest of us. High tax rates on high income would discourage high income earners from taking as much, leaving more for everyone else, creating an ever-larger Middle Class. Inheritance Tax also fuels the Middle Class for the same reason that it redistributes wealth. Interestingly, reduced taxation also increases liberty if we eliminate taxes that subsidize The Rich, called regressive taxes, like Sales Tax, and Payroll tax. If people understood the primary function of taxes, to redistribute liberty, then choices of what is taxed & how much would be obvious.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-30_343_taxes_increase_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-30_343_taxes_increase_liberty.mp3 2:24 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash taxation, taxes, liberty, politics, humor no Mon, 01 Jan 2018 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy "Middle Class" in America is supposedly as little as $40K per year, but that number seems to be chosen to keep the figures from looking so grim; it really takes $80-100K a year to live what Americans consider a fulfilling life. Upper Middle Class is well into the 6-figures, usually via two high wage-earners, maybe total $250K per year in a city. A healthy society would expect an ever-increasing Middle Class as a percentage of the population, but America has not been experiencing that since the so-called Reagan Revolution when the focus shifted from creating wealth to accumulating it. To begin, the winner-take-all aspect of our society tends to make The Rich richer, and doesn't have a lot of room for anyone else. The fact is, the top end of our population is interchangeable; how someone becomes a high-paid banker is much more a result of their family connections & fraternity than merit, and that person could be replaced by lottery from 10 million other competent people. It's luck that brought them there: inherited, right place, right time, whatever? Wealth becomes concentrated in those that already have it; for a Middle Class to increase, there has to be a constant redistribution of wealth, one way or another, and if Market Forces won't do it, taxation will have to.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-30_342_enlarging_the_middle_class.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-30_342_enlarging_the_middle_class.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Middle Class, politics, humor no Sat, 30 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy A society can focus on its most competent individuals, or its least capable members, but not both, one group must become subservient to the needs of the other. It seems obvious that aligning a society behind its most competent individuals, a meritocracy, would be ideally effective and practical, but this simple straightforward outlook on life is very controversial because there are many people who believe that a society is best defined by how it treats its least capable members: the young, the old, and the mentally impaired. Whether this belief arises from religious tenets, compassion, or envy is immaterial, the proponents of the concept will wrap themselves in a mantle of self-righteous indignation that no amount of rational debate will penetrate. The goal of a Liberty Nation is the most-liberty-to-the most-people, but the main problem with a meritocracy is that it conflicts with that goal. If only the top 1% “deserve” success, how does that impact the opportunity of the other 99%? Worse, the idea of meritocracy has the fatal flaw of who & what determines merit. In America, the primary measurement of merit is birth: the wealth & success of your parents determine your wealth & success. This hasn't always been the case, America used to be the “land of opportunity,” but that was because when America was young, its aristocracy had not yet established perpetual control over all things. As laudable as a meritocracy sounds, it ends up delivering the most-liberty-to-whoever-gets-there-first.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-30_341_meritocracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-30_341_meritocracy.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash meritocracy, politics, humor no Thu, 28 Dec 2017 08:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the depths of our feelings of emotion: Human beings default to their base emotions, and only rise above them with effort. Without love, humanity would simply be animals. Hate is required to overcome man's natural inclination to avoid conflict. Demanding empathy is a method of gaining control. Criticism is only destructive. The most valuable ingredient in any society is cooperation. Politics is the art of balancing bullying & persuasion. Scorn & ridicule is the primary defense mechanism of The Left. Taunting is a satirist's job. Shunning is how the status quo maintain their power. The most effective methods of control exploit humanity's base motivations. Everybody wants to be special, and they are, to themselves anyway. It's better to be intelligent than smart but wisdom is a good substitute for either. Interactive student testing is the secret to a good education. IQ can't help but be political because it categorizes people. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-29_340_emotional_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-29_340_emotional_concepts.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash emotional concepts, politics, humor no Tue, 26 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy IQ is controversial because it measures people against people, and nobody in the bottom half likes that... I wouldn't like that, which is why IQ deserves to be heavily scrutinized but that doesn't mean it should be ignored. The real danger is misapplication, and drawing unwarranted conclusions for political reasons. For example, in group comparisons of U.S. math & science students verses many of the countries that supposedly far exceed the performance of our students, too many things are being mixed together; many nations don't include their "stupid" kids in the averages. In head-to-head comparisons, Americans are holding their own on the “gifted” front. Concerning the race-baiting aspect of IQ: telling people something doesn't exist when it's right before their eyes just undermines any further argument. If all the really intelligent people emigrate from Africa, what's left is a mess. If highly competent Asian immigrants encourage high achievers, their children will push up the Bell Curve. We do not have to be racist to emulate the positive attributes of racially dominated societies, nor should we excuse the self-defeating actions of failing societies by claiming everyone is equally intelligent. Unfortunately, It's possible that IQ is too politicized to useful in debate any longer, which means the lower half has actually won.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-29_339_iq.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-29_339_iq.mp3 2:08 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash IQ, politics, humor no Sun, 24 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The argument AGAINST testing students in school is strong only because the testing model is the same as the teaching model: large groups of kids sitting at desks at the same time, grouped by age. Absolutely outdated, ridiculous & perverse. However, student testing is the secret of Charter Schools & alternative learning methods: as long as a student reaches the equivalency standards set by an accreditation body, it doesn't make any difference how that student learned the information. Computer-based-self-paced learning benefits the most from flexible testing methods because tests can be taken as often as needed, and tailored exactly to what the student is having difficulty with. Self-paced testing could be provided throughout the instruction, almost hidden and certainly not a cause for anxiety. Testing doesn't have to be multiple-choice questions, and many things that are important to mental & social maturity can't be tested that way anyway. Subtle tests embedded into video games would be more entertainment than chore: compute the trajectory, know what components make up a planet's atmosphere, understand how politics underlies society. There's absolutely no reason there can't be as much learning in a game as there is play. Additionally, many more refreshers could be insinuated into the student's learning curriculum if a computer was analyzing what made the student perform best. Frankly, the only commonality among all the educating possibilities is testing.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-29_338_student_testing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-29_338_student_testing.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash student testing, politics, humor no Fri, 22 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000002101 StartFragment:0000000438 EndFragment:0000002084 There's a difference between smart and intelligent: smart is quick response, facile speech & prodigious memory skills. Medical students are smart. Intelligence is the ability to solve unique problems. Intelligent people can synthesize solutions out of whatever materials are available to them. Engineers are intelligent. Wisdom is the ability to predict the future. Of course, no one can actually predict the future, but because situations tend to repeat themselves, how something turned out in the past is probably how it will play out now. Old people are wise because they have a lot of life experience, and they can be wise regardless of smartness or intelligence. Wisdom increases with age while smartness decreases, and intelligence remains constant. Enlightenment is the understanding of things around you. You can be enlightened about a thing or about all things, at the most minute level or in the grand panorama of life. Educated & experienced people are enlightened. Self-awareness is understanding your own motives; mostly base like envy, spite & resentment, that cause you to act and do as you do. By understanding yourself, you can reasonably guess how other people will respond to most situations. Self-awareness does not seem to be learned, and most people's emotional maturity plateaus before they achieve it: they do not understand their own motives, they simply react to them, and they have no idea why other people act as they do. Unfortunately, most people are not self-aware.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-28_337_smart_v_intelligent.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-28_337_smart_v_intelligent.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash intelligent, intelligence, smart, wisdom, self-awareness, self awareness, politics, humor no Wed, 20 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000001893 StartFragment:0000000438 EndFragment:0000001876 Everybody thinks they're the center of the universe... And they're right. As long as you're trapped inside your own head, what other people think & need are almost inconsequential; they might as well all be figments of your imagination. Being special is being the center of attention; it's admiration, it's accolades, it's someone else caring about everything you do. Is there really any vice so sweet as fame? How could it be otherwise, if not for our own self-importance, we would have no importance at all. For those that eschew the spotlight, there's the subtle specialness of being among the chosen that survive the flood, are not turned into pillars of salt, or are raptured. Christians, for example, eagerly anticipate the Second Coming when they get their heavenly rewards & the sinners are chastised. They do business with & offer special deals to each other with no thought of the social consequences because everybody else is going to burn anyway. Their meetings are imbued with a sense of self-righteous exceptionalism & smug elitism, as does Islam & Jews. But how does that play out in the general community over the long run? Hey, Special Guys, I got news for you: it ain't Satan, it's your own actions of self-centered specialness that bring wrath to your doorstep.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-28_336_everybody_wants_to_be_special.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-28_336_everybody_wants_to_be_special.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash special, politics, humor no Mon, 18 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000002053 StartFragment:0000000438 EndFragment:0000002036 We are always in a battle for control, sometimes taking, mostly losing. Knowing that you are being manipulated is the first priority but then you have to know how, and that can be more difficult. The most effective manipulation is that which triggers your emotions: anger, modesty, sympathy, greed. Successful politicians know how to exploit your base motives such as envy & resentment: take from the rich, give to the poor. Family, friends & church leverage your more social feelings of charity, love, compassion: take care of your aged parents. These emotions evolved because they keep societies together, and societies breed more children, so guess who won the great game of selective breeding. The most obvious methods of dominance are demanding that everyone participate in prayer, salutes, singing & pledges, but there are much more subtle methods people use to gain control over you. First & foremost is claiming a disability, usually something minor, such as allergies, poor hearing, or difficulty walking. Then there's passive-aggressiveness; saying you are going to do something then not doing it. Being easily offended is the current most common means of control used by The Left. Other examples are Fake News preying on your trust, and people insisting you cater to their special diet. All of these manipulation techniques take advantage of people's courtesy & conflict avoidance. Your only defense is to be a little less of both.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-28_335_methods_of_control.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-28_335_methods_of_control.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash control, politics, humor no Sat, 16 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000002005 StartFragment:0000000438 EndFragment:0000001988 If we somehow criminalize taunting, scorn & ridicule like we have bullying, then the only incivility left as a club to beat our fellow human beings will be... Shunning, which is Constitutionally protected by our Freedom of Association. Humans are social animals, it's built into our DNA, and most people have it bad, so-much-so that we always tend to travel in packs, and loners are considered odd, even sociopathic. Often the only weapon people have in relationships is control over their company: those they like, they associate with courteously, and those for whom they are trying to modify behavior are shunned. To be rejected by your peers is devastating. Children are especially vulnerable to shunning because once isolated outside their home, they have no place to go. Shunning will continue to be the most effective weapon for controlling human behavior that a so-called “civil” society has at its disposal. Shunning also plays well with self-interest; it's a way of gate-keeping, of limiting access, of maintaining the status quo. Why do jobs require references? Why do professional organizations require a sponsor? This shunning strategy, of course, bumps against two of the requirements of a Liberty society: first of which is to respect your allies, and second; it's a way of hoarding opportunity. Social contracts will weaken at the same rate as shunning becomes more prevalent & accepted.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-28_334_shunning.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-28_334_shunning.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash shunning, politics, humor no Thu, 14 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000001666 StartFragment:0000000438 EndFragment:0000001649 Taunting is not something you regularly see a lot of outside of sports & kids movies, probably because it seems both ineffective & juvenile. There are professional taunters, called satirists, through which people can vicariously taunt. In that context, taunting is an important tool to identify the teams: those who oppose you are the ones that take umbarge to the taunt, your side feels superior, and those that are ambivalent obviously have no position. Because of this aspect of taunting, it might even be good for society, giving clarity, but it's still not justifable to draw pictures of Mohammad just to flush out the crazies, nor abuse the American flag for vindictive & spiteful reasons. However, it IS a satirist's job to provoke, to taunt, to make sure the door of Free Speech is wide open. Charlie Hebdo, the French satire magazine artists that were gunned down by Islamists upset about the magazine drawing pictures of Mohammad, was ABSOLUTELY doing their job, and were in no way responsible for results of their actions, just as a fireman has ZERO responsibility for their death if they are killed in a fire.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-27_333_taunting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-27_333_taunting.mp3 1:53 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash taunting, politics, humor no Tue, 12 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000001812 StartFragment:0000000438 EndFragment:0000001795 The most odious, life-altering contagion of children and adults alike is scorn & ridicule. Juvenile scorn & ridicule may leave psychology scars, but in adulthood, scorn & ridicule has become a science of personal destruction, made worse because are no judicial or social penalties for engaging in it. People who support of a nation of liberty recognized that courtesy & dignity are important to maintaining social order, which is why the worst scorn & ridicule offenders are antagonistic towards personal liberty. Unfortunately, scorn & ridicule is often applauded, especially in politics. It has been my experience that those people who feel alienated in childhood are the most vehement purveyors of scorn & ridicule as adults, and because outliers gravitate towards the Democratic Party, scorn & ridicule in their ranks is pervasive. Adding to the problem, due to the often passive-aggressive expression of scorn & ridicule, it is difficult to recognize cognitively so difficult to defend against. No training in political debate is complete without teaching how to deal with scorn & ridicule, which is to state that it is happening, condemn the person doing it, and then ignore it.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-27_332_scorn__ridicule.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-27_332_scorn__ridicule.mp3 2:03 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash scorn, ridicule, politics, humor no Sun, 10 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Childhood is a traumatic time but monsters in the closet are nothing compared to the fear-induced paralysis caused by bullies. Physical bullying has always been terrible, much worse for males than females, but girls get enough of it to know how frightening it is walking to school or going out for recess where the bullies have access to you. Thankfully, bullying has been recognized for the evil that it is and society is finally trying to get a handle on it; one down. Subtle bullying, however, though it doesn't involve violence or verbal abuse, is just as effective a weapon & impossible to defend against. While obvious bullying has judicial & social penalties, psychological bullying, primarily passive-aggressive in nature, is impossible to prove even if it was illegal: don't do what the bully wants then you'll suffer ridicule, shunning & insult; and crafty psychological bulliers rarely reveal themselves beyond those they are bullying. Our politics is full of bullies, people with totalitarian tendencies that won't admit that their tactics are the same as bullies. They use fear & apprehension, both psychological, and due to the payoff of political success, political bullying is only getting worse, with no end in sight. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-18_331_bullying.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-18_331_bullying.mp3 2:06 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash bullying, politics, humor no Fri, 08 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy People only voluntarily cooperate if they benefit from it, like any transaction. In a Liberty society, most cooperative relationships are as voluntary allies; even if you don't like the person or organization you are cooperating with, the advantage to you is more than if you didn't cooperate, so you do. In this atmosphere, cooperating entities each have the leverage that all allies have, which is we must both benefit in a way that satisfies our wants & needs. Both Libertarians & Socialists ignore the voluntary agreement to mutual benefit required for cooperation. Libertarians only think about their needs without consideration of what other people desire, so they fail to form any alliances. Socialists determine what needs are best-for-everyone and force all to accept them, voluntary or not. Some people will not cooperate because they aren't satisfied by the exchange, or simply out of spite & perversity. These people are anathema to a society, and what to do with them becomes problematic. This is where indoctrination comes in: if you want people to cooperate, they must be raised with the same values & attitudes, and a lot less diversity. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-18_330_cooperation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-18_330_cooperation.mp3 2:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash cooperation, politics, humor no Wed, 06 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Debate is not criticism. Discussion is not criticism. Opinion is not criticism. Criticism is destructive, and most criticism germinates from spite & vindictiveness. There is no higher form: constructive criticism is an oxymoron, criticism is never constructive, that's why it's called criticism & not a suggestion. Being a critic is the easiest of all possible jobs; do nothing but still have power, even control, because perfect is the enemy of good. Considering the randomness of who's criticism you are hearing, their opinion has no consequence unless your actions directly infringe on their liberty, and widen the field enough & there's nothing that can't be criticized, meaning if people listened to their critics they would never get anything done. Criticism is a supple & effective weapon, whether used bluntly or passive-aggressively, and it's a competitive stricture that can never be overcome. The only way to defend against criticism is to ignore it. Criticism is one of the things you don't do because you don't want it done to you, an indice of courtesy. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-02_329_criticism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-02_329_criticism.mp3 1:50 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash criticism, politics, humor no Mon, 04 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy What is empathy? It's a word that was only made up in the early 1900s and has found a lot of traction because it's subjective, so anyone can say there isn't enough of it, whatever it is? According to dictionary.com, empathy is "the intellectual identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another." That seems ludicrous on its face; no one can know what or how another person is feeling, and to think they can is hubris in its own right. For example, Progressives harp on empathy but exhibit none themselves. They confuse empathy with being self-righteous and indignant, and find it difficult to believe that there are people who think other than they do; people who have different values, goals, and ambitions. Physicians are taught to empathize with their patients. In fact, they are tested on it, so next time you go to the doctor and they ask, "how's your parents' health," and you say, "my mom died at 80 about 20 years ago," the doctor will say, "oh, I'm so very sorry to hear that," in a soothing, monotone pitch, that is completely insincere. That's what they are taught empathy is, but most people use the word “empathy” as code for envy, spite, avarice & resentment; a politician that empathizes with his constituency appeals to to their base motives. The real meaning of empathy, not the venal distortion, is to NOT feel envy, NOT feel superior nor self-righteous... To be sincere. To overcome those feelings, that is true empathy. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-16_328_empathy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-16_328_empathy.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash empathy, politics, humor no Sat, 02 Dec 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy A person & community is primarily the sum of instinctual human emotions, mostly negative: envy, spite, resentment, vindictiveness, greed, covetousness, avarice, lust, and of course, hate. Evolutionarily speaking, fear is running & hate is killing. Hate does not always lead to killing but eliminating a competitor or a source of stress can be advantageous for society cohesion. Climbing the dominance hierarchy sometimes requires killing, usually preceded by hate. Hate causes change, also a good thing evolutionarily. A person who can kill without hate, however, is called a sociopath. Hate is a powerful motivator, so in a battle for ideology, especially one that will affect the existing social structure, even reverse it, the weakest side will denounce “hate” as a way to disarm their opposition. They are tapping into fear, another powerful base emotion, and exploiting religious indoctrination. In a liberty sense, recognizing an ally hates you is important to defend against, but does not otherwise invalidate your explicit social agreement not to harm one another. Liberty puts no limits on thoughts, they remain your own, and whether you hate those around you is up to you, not them. The anti-hate-mongers are also anti-liberty, both strategically because they are the ones wanting to upend the existing system for their own gain, and because they are fearful, which is why they are on the receiving end of social dominance in the first place. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-16_327_hate.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-16_327_hate.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash hate, politics, humor no Thu, 30 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Love is real; at least the genetically-programmed infatuation kind that causes young boy's hearts to ache & their faces to color when the Little Red-Haired Girl is close. I certainly experienced it when I was younger, the thing we call romantic love but is obviously raging hormones. I felt that way about my wife as a teenager, and when we're apart for a long time, it even happens now. Eventually, that kind of love dissipates, and most people find mature love: a selfless devotion to someone for no particular reason, without any compensation, even a willingness to sacrifice your life for them. Besides the evolutionary need for love, so that two people will remain together to raise children, there is also a very personal benefit. The world is a complicated & dangerous place, and the stress that causes in the human body through the release of the hormone cortisol is unhealthy. Though stress allows you to escape a bear, it actually damages the brain in the long term. To reduce stress, humans need daily routine & predictability in their lives, and a close partner provides that stability. The comfortable rhythm of domestication acts as a bulwark against an overwhelming outside world, from which you return to the secure, relaxing, calming embrace of your lover. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-14_326_love.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-14_326_love.mp3 2:08 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash love, politics, humor no Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The reason it's so hard to “fix” anything in America is because we have based our predictions of human behavior on a false set of assumptions. Americans are raised to be optimistic and forward-thinking, with a strong undercurrent of Judaeo-Christian values that stress honesty, integrity, loyalty & other altruistic feelings, but in fact, students of human nature throughout history know that homo sapiens are evolutionary creatures who respond first to the most base animal instincts and reactions, and it's only through conditioning & training that we raise above our base emotions of envy, spite, resentment, greed. sloth, gluttony, avarice & lust to achieve our more enlightened ideals. Your own self-awareness can be measured by the percentage of time you are able to raise above your base emotions: how quickly were you able to overcome your envy so that you could express true congratulations on your brother’s new job? Could you leave the largest pieces of pie for the people who would enjoy it most? Can you feel admiration for the guy with a better education than you rather than resentment? But even if you have braced yourself against base motives, know that the people around you may not have been as successful in subsuming their own irrational negativity, and are thinking those things about you. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-14_325_base_emotions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-14_325_base_emotions.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash emotions, politics, humor no Sun, 26 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review several of the concepts around medicine: The stricture against euthanasia is the fear that you are the one who will be euthanized. Eugenics is a good idea with a bad track record. China's One-Child policy made it the world-leading nation it is today. “Defensive medicine” is more about the dollars than the patient. Liability is a confused concept when it is applied to the subjectivity of medicine. No one wants to think about death which is why End-of-Life care lurks in the shadows. Medical Research is a whole lot more flash than fact. Why people can't receive money for their organs defies rational explanation. The easiest way to gain control & attention is to claim you eat special food. Diabetes is ALL about diet. Sugar is the true culprit in our search for the cause of obesity. The Food Police won't be satisfied until you're eating the food they want you to. OCD is bad but moderate OCB traits are actually positive. What used to be odd behavior is now called “autism,” and the baggage that entails. Schizophrenia blurs the liberty issue because the choice not to take the medication makes you completely useless to society. The mainstreaming of “depression” has turned normal people into victims. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-12_324_medical_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-12_324_medical_concepts.mp3 3:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash medical concepts, politics, humor no Fri, 24 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Depression is the most common mental illness, affecting over 16 million Americans, and those are the ones who report it; there are a lot of sufferers, especially men who, according to Thoreau, “lead lives of quiet desperation.” Depression is a natural aspect of biology: high insulin levels from eating to much sugar, low dopamine levels from not getting enough sleep, hormonal changes during menopause & low testosterone in men as they age. Depression is just the opposite of euphoria, another chemically induced state our body enjoys. Your body is a drug factory, and the swing from elation to despair and back goes on in everybody everyday, some more than others. When the swing is too much, a person's mental faculties are compromised to the point of mental illness, called Bipolar. People are evolved to get enjoyment from simple accomplishments, like having enough food to eat, evading an enemy, or building shelter. When those things are provided without effort, it becomes more difficult to find individual purpose, and it's getting harder because depression is a symptom of affluence. Unfortunately, by broadening the definition of “mental illness” to include depression, everyone is mentally ill, and substitute drugs for fulfillment, no different than any drug addict. We are all victims of our biology. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-12_323_depression.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-12_323_depression.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash depression, bipolar, politics, humor no Wed, 22 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Like most mental illness, schizophrenia is a clinical diagnosis: 2 out of a gaggle of possible symptoms, or 1 if hearing voices telling you to hurt someone. Since schizophrenia without drug treatment is totally debilitating, it's a frightening disease, akin to dementia in its drag on society. Schizophrenic people can't do anything, except, and here's the good news, if they're medicated. You probably can't tell a schizophrenic when they take their medication, until they don't, then it's the homeless guy talking to himself on the street. There's a huge liberty issue here: on the one hand, a schizophrenic has the same Rights as everyone else, and if they don't want to take medication, that's their choice; but on the other hand, the manifestation of schizophrenia makes that person completely useless & unproductive. There are over 3 million schizophrenic Americans, as compared to 8 million alcoholics. There's a subtle difference between forcing someone to take their medication to be a productive member of society, and forcing them not to drink alcohol for the same reason... Or is there? Can a mentally ill person's liberty be infringed if the result is that their self-awareness can be recovered? Only if they are a threat to themselves or others. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-12_322_schizophrenia.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-12_322_schizophrenia.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash schizophrenia, politics, humor no Mon, 20 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy What happened to autism? What used to be out-of-the-ordinary behavior has been turned into a mental illness. At the extreme edge, the barely functioning autistic has always evoked reactions of surprise, pity & yes, fear, in other people, but that is the far end of the spectrum. There's a large cohort of non-autistic people that used to get the special designation, “Asperger's,” to signify that they're fully functional but exhibit, what some might consider, eccentric behavior. In the past they certainly weren't considered mentally ill but now they carry the “autism” label. Why? How has oddness become a badge of victimhood? I've known many Asperger's people, and for some it takes a civilized, patient demeanor to be around them. In fact, sometimes I'd rather not be but I do because that's the Deal: they pretend nothing's wrong with them & I pretend I don't care. What's happened, I think, is that the crowd trying to turn everyone into victims for political purposes wanted to absorb the Asperger's folks because they're, for the most part, rational & competent people, and the Post-Modernists want some of that aura because they don't have any of their own. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-10_321_autism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-10_321_autism.mp3 1:55 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash autism, Asperger's, politics, humor no Sat, 18 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Obsessive Compulsive DISORDER, OCD, is a debilitating mental illness that is difficult to treat, but Obsessive Compulsive BEHAVIOR, OCB, can actually be a beneficial character trait. OCD leaves people standing in front of doors incessantly turning the knob, while OCB's impulse to recheck all the numbers in a report, keep your In Basket empty or your house clean all lead to a better, more secure life. There probably is no dividing line between compulsive behavior & conscientiousness, and it increases with age, even while impulsiveness, in general, decreases. OCB is a trait one can be thankful for, yet the spectrum is stark one, and should a person be too far into letting the compulsions control them, rather than they controlling the compulsions, that is indeed a tragedy. Luckily, compulsiveness can be treated cognitively, meaning if you can just recognize what you're doing, you can do something about it, usually facilitated by a therapist. In the universe of human personality & emotion, the old axiom that you must control your feelings, don't let them control you, applies more to compulsions than it does to anything else. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-10_320_ocd.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-10_320_ocd.mp3 2:03 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash OCD, OCB, obsessive compulsive, politics, humor no Thu, 16 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy It's not the pretentious, self-indulgent so-called "foodies" that pose a Food Police threat, it's the sanctimonious, self-righteous paternalists that want to tell you what to put inside of your own body. Obesity is a problem but the solution isn't government regulation of what you're eating, most clearly demonstrated by the Soft Drink trolls who want to tax soda pop, as if that does anything but create a new bureaucracy, and of course, they also want to tax even Diet soda, so the intent isn't to do something about sugar intake, it's an excuse for a revenue generator. Then there's the people who are terrified of what they call “GMO,” Genetically Modified Organism food. These people, and there's a lot of them, want food with any GMO content labeled, but this is simply a backdoor attempt at controlling what everyone eats, because when 88% of corn and 93% of soy is GMO, most of the food on the shelves that use these products would be labeled “GMO,” with outrage & prohibitive political action the obvious next step. Ironically, a raising food fad is “gluten free,”which means not eating non-GMO grains. Essentially, grains that had their genetics changed “naturally,” not through GMO inside some evil laboratory, are worse for you than the ones that are. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-08_319_the_food_police.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-08_319_the_food_police.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Food Police, GMO, politics, humor no Tue, 14 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Sugar is the biggest change to the human diet in 10,000 years. The epidemic of obesity in America can be laid at the feet of this one thing: not lack of exercise, not fast food, not gut fauna, no... SUGAR is ground zero. Fat comes from sugar. You eat fruit, that's sugar; you eat carbs, that's sugar. And it's not like science hasn't known what the problem is for half a century, they're just getting immense pushback from vested interests: fruit-growers, bakers, and most cynically, the Sugar Industry. Since the Sugar Industry intentionally took our eye off the ball in the late 1980s with the totally fallacious "fats are causing obesity" distraction, Fatty Liver disease & diabetes has gone up 1000s of percent. The Sugar Industry also attacks sugar substitutes, promote fad diets, and worst of all, they repress & confuse science. Society must fight back. The Obesity epidemic can only be cured through indoctrination, like standing in line, not hitting, not smoking & not eating sugar. If you want kids to stop getting fat, discourage sugar consumption when they're young, and as they get older, encourage monitoring of sugar intake by reading the nutritional labels on food. Yes, the insanely powerful Sugar Industry will fight back tooth-n-nail, but Big Tobacco was muzzled, and so shall they be. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-08_318_sugar.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-08_318_sugar.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sugar, Sugar Industry, politics, humor no Sun, 12 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Justifying the hype, America really does have a Diabetes epidemic. The cost of diabetes to the nation is over a quarter trillion dollars, top of healthcare spending. Want to reduce the cost of healthcare, diabetes is first on the list. Fortunately, diabetes can almost always be cured with diet. Unfortunately, somebody somewhere called what fat people get, "diabetes," and that gets confused with the life-ending “diabetes” that children get. The other HUGE confusion about diabetes is that the cause & effect are reversed: people take insulin shots because of their high blood sugar, when what they should be doing is controlling their blood sugar with diet so they don't have to take shots. The diabetes epidemic is really the obesity epidemic, and until we as a nation address obesity as the problem it is, diabetes will become a bigger & bigger problem. BUT NO, as a country, we fixate on things that make healthy people claim to be special, so we have special vegan restaurants, and special gluten-free restaurants, and special "organic" restaurants, while diabetics are treated as if they are normal people who can eat anything. How come all the hipsters aren't like, "oh, gosh, yeah, I'm really special because I have diabetes and I need special food, and, you know, I'm special." Why not? Because diabetics have to draw blood 3x/day, shoot up 4, and die young. That's tough to fake, and not worth the extra attention. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-07_317_diabetes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-07_317_diabetes.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash diabetes, politics, humor no Fri, 10 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Everyone is to one extent or another, a primadonna, wanting to make it about them, take control, give orders. The most common manifestation of this basic impulse is the fetish for special food, especially when accompanied by the “what I put in my body” sanctimony. Mostly this is harmless vanity, but if someone wants to be special by demanding special attention about their diet, it's not society's responsibility to cater to them. Let boutique businesses do the “gluten free," "organic," “non GMO,” “cruelty free” & "I'm vegan" pandering; as long as I can eat cheap food grown with fertilizers & pesticides, it's no skin off my back. But that's the problem: many of Special Diet people wallow in self-importance, making spectacles of themselves in public, even demanding everyone eat their special diet. To cater to this narcissism is to encourage it. Luckily, people tend to grow out of their self-importance, which is what maturity will do for a Liberty society, even one without a special diet. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-07_316_special_diet.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-07_316_special_diet.mp3 1:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash special diet, politics, humor no Wed, 08 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy In several European countries, you have to opt-out of organ donation on your Driver's license, rather than opt-in like in America. In fact, Opt-in countries have a very low percentage of people willing to let their own misfortune be someone else's opportunity, even in the so-called egalitarian countries. It's understandable: if people want my organs, they're going to have to pay for them, with the money going to whoever I decide, but there's a law against it, so the people who need my organs are screwed. Kidneys are prime example; everybody has two of them, and they're worth a fortune, but the doctor can get paid, the nurses can get paid, the hospital can get paid, and the janitor can get paid, but you have to GIVE your kidney away, hence, kidneys are in incredible short supply. The moral argument used against paying for organs is that rich people will be buying the kidneys of poor people, but the fact is, with universal healthcare, poor people get kidneys too, and need them more often, so the spread is on the side of poor people. And why is it a poor person can sell years of their life working in a menial job but not sell their organs? Is living like a slave better than living with one kidney, not to mention that even if you give your kidney away at death, a rich person might get it anyway, while your family gets nothing. And the morals seem fluid: what about baby harvesting, surrogate mothers don't work for free. The stricture against selling organs is ridiculous, selectively applied, and hurts everyone involved. The arguments against it are confused & illogical, like most moralistic arguments tend to be, which is why morals & liberty don't mix. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-04_315_organ_donations.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-04_315_organ_donations.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash organ donations, politics, humor no Mon, 06 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The aura around medical research is one part greed, one part hope & one part charlatanism. Medicine is not a science and the people who become doctors are not scientists. Surgeons, in particular, are even less scientific than doctors. Medical researchers are often MDs but they don't have to be, probably just as many are PhDs, and a lot are both. It's unfortunate that an MD has more social cachet than a PhD, because PhDs are the ones with engineer-quality brains trained to act in a scientific manner. Luckily, almost half-a-million European PhD medical researchers are in the U.S. for the money. American politicians often tout American medical research as the best in the world but considering the money spent on it, that claim is debatable. The best measure of quality & quantity of medical research in a head-to-head comparison could be the number of published papers, but European doctors have just slightly less with much less money spent to encourage them. Or it could be the size of their drug companies, but three of the top five are European. Or it could be the health of its citizenry, but the U.S. ranks near the bottom of the list verses Europe. Though American medical research is ultimately measured a huge success, like healthcare in general, leaving medical research in the hands of the Market has come at great expense to America's people, and it doesn't have to be. Medical research, like medicine, is a socialistic pursue not amenable to Market Forces. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-04_314_medical_research.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-04_314_medical_research.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash medical research, politics, humor no Sat, 04 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It's odd that no decision in your life is more important than dying yet that is an inevitability most of us intentionally ignore, especially the price. Nationally, End-of-Life care costs hover around 10% of total U.S. healthcare spending, which seems reasonable, but those are the physical costs, the mental costs are immeasurable, especially when the patient is still considered young. Something evolutionary causes most older people to prepare for their death, some even welcome it. “Hospice” is the term used to describe those people who have accepted their fate, are at peace with the world & prepared to survive the last days of their lives in morphine's sweet embrace. The care they seek is far different than the frantic steps taken to extend the life, often only marginally, of The Young. Rational decisions about End-of-Life care are difficult to tease out, especially when multiple family members are involved, but doctors are specially trained to negotiate those angst-filled meetings, usually successfully, and the End-of-Life industry continues to operate smoothly. There are those that fight to the last breath regardless of their quality-of-life, or lack thereof, especially when the cause of their demise is something as insidious as cancer, an invisible malady whose gradual onset seems unreal and unfair. The drugs that fight cancer are inordinately expensive, and the time & place to administer them is restricted, and will remain so because no Market System can spontaneously arise to address the product of “cancer.” There are no cheaper options when the choice is death. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-02_313_end-of-life_care.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-02_313_end-of-life_care.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash end of life care, dying, politics, humor no Thu, 02 Nov 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Medicine is NOT a science, though it has science-like aspects. As proof, quack remedies like acupuncture, chiropractic, homeopathy, massage-therapy & the like would not be part of the treatment regiment of a “science.” It's because many patients can simply be treated via placebo, which is totally mental, that encourages the reliance on mysticism, and religion is also often evolved, adding another layer of spiritualism, the opposite of science. When something is as subjective, irrational & personal as medicine, liability does not apply. Adding avarice to this raucous mix, American attorneys are perversely incentivized to pursue contingency fee-based liability jackpots, engendering an adversarial relationship between doctors & patients, and due to vagaries in the tort system, irresponsible people often aren't the ones held responsible. Liability award caps don't necessarily solve the problem because doctors are more worried about the tarnish to their reputations rather than the money. Award caps would lower insurance premiums which would allow doctors more leeway in what they practice. The real solution is to indemnify doctors against medical liability altogether. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-02_312_medical_liability.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-07-02_312_medical_liability.mp3 2:04 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash medical liability, liability, politics, humor no Tue, 31 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy So-called, “defensive medicine” is speculation that high medical costs are a result of unneeded medical tests & procedures performed on patients to avoid lawsuits. The reality is that there are two perverse incentives for extraneous medical attention: first, since both insurance & Medicare pay the doctor based on what they do and not what they say, doctors must do something, and the more somethings they do, like labs & imaging, the more they're paid. Then there's the liability aspect of medicine: many tests are performed simply so that the doctor does not have to explain why they weren't. Sometimes there's the threat of a remote possibility that they might get sued, but mostly it's a doctor-to-doctor criticism: one doctor thinking a test should be performed and censoring another doctor for not doing so. To solve the first problem, doctors should get a set fee for an appointment, and if they do order investigative activities, they should receive no further renumeration for those except to cover the basic cost. Secondly, “Standard of Care” rules should protect doctors: if they perform to the Standard of Care, they are indemnified from lawsuits. Both of these solutions are being implemented to one degree or another by the organizations that are cost sensitive; Medicare & insurance, but because medicine is doled out State by State, where doctor's licenses aren't even valid in other States, the haphazardness of the attempts to cost-contain are often thwarted. A uniform national Medical License, medical insurance, and governing body has long been needed. It's only prevented by vested interests & gate-keepers, not by what's best for patients. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-30_311_defensive_medicine.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-30_311_defensive_medicine.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash defensive medicine, politics, humor no Sun, 29 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In the hierarchy of Rights, where does bearing children come in? And when is there a State interest to intervene? Since society's imperative is to perpetuate itself, the Right to bear children hovers near the top, however, China's One Child policy was a main ingredient contributing to its emergence as a World Power, and arguably is leading to more individual liberty for all of its citizens. China's approach cured terrible poverty, albeit generating other problems, but I'm guessing the vast majority of their citizens would not go back. This is prima fascia evidence that restricting childbearing until passing some metric or condition will significantly improve society. There is a legitimate discussion about encouraging population control in the Third World as part of any strategy to intervene during their unending crisis of poverty. The West has exactly the opposite problem: we want to encourage childbearing but instead we discourage it through our focus on creating an Aristocracy & providing a comfortable retirement for The Old, together which consume most of the available resources, stagnating the opportunity & income among those who should be having children. Combine that with the high costs of raising children, not to mention the burden it places on parents, and it's easy to understand why all Western societies have shrinking indigenous populations. Also, because childbearing is a Women's Rights issue, a woman cannot be forced to bear nor abort a fetus. The choice of who will have children coming from the State is certainly an issue of Personal Liberty: does most-liberty-to-most-people tomorrow justify imposing on liberty today? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-30_310_one-child_policy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-30_310_one-child_policy.mp3 2:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash One Child policy, childbearing Right, politics, humor no Fri, 27 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy What is eugenics? It's often confused with evolution because breeding dogs or pigeons results in offspring with selected characteristics, but in the case of evolution, that leads to a new species, while when dogs are again allowed to randomly interbreed, they eventually turn back into wolves. And it's not just physical characteristics, there are breeds of dogs that are smarter, however, wolves are pretty damn smart too. Eugenics has been around a long time: when individuals practice self-selective mating, we consider that a natural part of life, so eugenics in its own right is not a negative thing. Eugenics does not affect liberty, and there are plenty of things about eliminating disabilities, increasing intelligence & improving the overall human genome that is in the interest of society, so what IS wrong with eugenics? Society's interest in creating better children through eugenics has been a real issue several times in history, mostly to its detriment as the science has been subverted. Eugenics doesn't really exhibit its weaknesses until it's used as cover for political aspirants, those conflating eugenics with subhumaness, who want to violate our ally-relationship with other ethnicities in our society. That's how the science of eugenics becomes the hate-mongering of racial purism. For now, you cannot discuss eugenics in America; it's the most politically incorrect of all Political Correctness. There's an infamous American book, "The Bell Curve," that covers the science of eugenics brilliantly and has survived vicious scrutiny, but even mentioning the book in public brings anger & derision from the Chattering Classes. Maybe in the future eugenics can get the attention it deserves without exploitation for political gain? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-28_309_eugenics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-28_309_eugenics.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash eugenics, politics, humor no Wed, 25 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy No word strikes more fear into the hearts of Old People than “euthanasia,” mercy killing, which is why you rarely hear it discussed. Physician-assisted suicide, which is legal in six States, is often confused with euthanasia, but in cases of euthanasia the physician administers the means of death, rather than the patient taking their own life under a doctor's supervision. Euthanasia is legal in some parts of the Western World but not in the U.S. Many people, mostly Holly-Rollers, say State-sponsored suicide leads inevitably to euthenasia but so far that hasn't been the case, and even if it was, almost 90% of the public support euthanasia for the terminally ill or those on life support, and over half of doctors do too. In the topsy-turvy world of the future, where a small number of workers are going to be supporting an ever-increasing burden of retired people who only consume goods & services without producing any themselves, supplies will be limited, which means euthanasia will definitely be getting some airtime. Whereas Physician-assisted suicide is an issue of Personal Liberty because the patient makes their own decision, euthanasia is a social issue that could sidestep the patient's liberty. Some choices are too difficult for a society to make until forced too, and euthanasia is certainly one, but many other pressing decisions in America are also seemingly impossible to make. Due to the demogogery of democracy, we have become a nation that only acts under duress. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-28_308_euthanasia.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-28_308_euthanasia.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash euthanasia, politics, humor no Mon, 23 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the concepts around Universal healthcare: The problems with healthcare are equal parts demagoguery & monopoly. The inequity of Obamacare is that it puts the burden for The Poor on the Middle Class. The irony of Universal healthcare is that the Middle Class will have less of it. A quick healthcare fix would to be add a Medicare For Anyone option. Hospitals should become Primary care providers. The VA never “failed,” its exploitation was simply exposed. Britain's National Health Service is a great model for the U.S. Lowering healthcare costs requires a dagger right in the heart of Capitalism & unions. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-26_307_healthcare_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-26_307_healthcare_concepts.mp3 1:49 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash healthcare, health care, universal healthcare, universal health care, politics, humor no Sat, 21 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It seems unlikely that the solution to lowering the cost of universal healthcare can come through politics, there are simply too many players: doctors, insurers, unions & entrepreneurs, who are complicit in the status quo, as proven by the Obamacare debacle. The reason Obamacare doesn't do cost containment is because the Insurance & Healthcare industries did not want it to; they're the ones who get the money, and they're the ones who run up the costs. But don't just blame self-interested business & unions; patients who expect the best of everything for nothing is a significant part of the problem. Socializing healthcare would be the best solution with its top-down cost containment; it's worked in other countries, and Medicare is already doing it. A Capitalist solution has not been forthcoming for the simple reason that healthcare is not a voluntary commodity; though not technically monopolistic, traditional market pressures do not apply. Liability issues are also unreasonably avaricious, both on the side of plaintiff attorneys & the insurance companies. And unions use the rhetoric of fairness but their reality is as exploitative as any of the other pigs at the trough. In the meantime, here is a fait accompli healthcare cost containment strategy: first, make Clinic nonprofit & encourage volunteerism; second, advertise set prices that include everything, including labs & devices; third, frustrate liability claims using legal artifices; forth, prevent unionization; and, most importantly, fly under the radar of vested interests. If it could become fashionable to use “organic” healthcare, perhaps it might just catch on? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-26_306_lowering_healthcare_costs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-26_306_lowering_healthcare_costs.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash healthcare, health care costs, politics, humor no Thu, 19 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The National Health Service, or NHS, is Britain's socialized healthcare. The NHS serves 60% of Britain's population via General Fund taxes, meaning there is no Payroll tax. The buildings are not glass monuments to medicine, but instead plain & unobtrusive, in the local neighborhood where patients can walk to them. Trucks with the specialized equipment, like MRIs, come around to the clinics on scheduled days, so everything is available. Everyone within the clinic's radius is assumed to be a patient, and annual patient contact is automated. All-in-all, the people who use it love it.   My wife & I used the NHS for a year while I studied medicine in Newcastle, England, going to the local clinic several times so I have a feel for what it's like. For example, I received a postcard telling me to come in for an annual checkup: I walked. My clinic was a refurbished brick building from the early 20th Century, homey & non-threatening. For starters, contrary to how it's portrayed in the U.S., there are no significant wait times, maybe 10 minutes. The examination was prompt, professional & efficient; I was out within a half hour. During my visits, I paid close attention to how things worked; what was right, and what was wrong. My conclusion: we need look no further for a model of how the U.S. should operate healthcare. The big question is: are Americans too egotistical for low-key, no fuss, utilitarian healthcare? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-26_305_nhs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-26_305_nhs.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash NHS, National Health Service, politics, humor no Tue, 17 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The Veterans Administration's healthcare has been lambasted for poor service, which was blamed on “government.” What? Do people think the VA has bad doctors with outdated equipment who are too lazy to do their job? Where did the impression that the VA is a failed boondoggle come from? Well, you need to look deeper than your sanctimony for the real reasons. First, Market Forces-types browbeat the VA to adopt policies that would financially incentivize administrators who used Market techniques that act in a perverse manner when applied to a social function, but that's not the primary reason.The ethos in the military towards the VA is to "get as much as you can get." Everyone is surreptitiously instructed on what to say & encouraged to game the system, with the mentality that veterans deserve it. This attitude is an open secret, and feeds back on itself because doctors in the VA know that a vast majority of the "patients" are faking it so they guess which ones are really sick & put the rest in an endless queue. This worked for decades; the leaches were half-assed shuffled through the system, labeled “disabled” in some manner, and booted out the door with hardly an examination. Unfortunately, from the outside, not knowing what's really happening, this looks like shoddy healthcare, and it is, but it's great service if you're dolling out free money. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-24_304_how_the_va_failed.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-24_304_how_the_va_failed.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash The VA, Vetrans Adminstration health care, healthcare, politics, humor no Sun, 15 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Almost all medical costs are fixed. A hospital doesn't get any cheaper by not having patients: the equipment & the medical staff have to be there whether there's one patient or the Waiting room is full. Think of the whole hospital as one cost & more people using it wouldn't make much difference to prices. Also, different costs assigned to different procedures are purely artificial: fixing a broken arm takes no more resources than “sniffles;” and an MRI of a head injury costs no more than treating a diabetic. Primary doctors are multi-disciplinary & multi-tasking, and if a specialist is needed, hospitals have escalation procedures for that; more patients cause little additional burden to the existing hospital infrastructure, and the drugs prescribed are overwhelmingly cheap generics. The ER works on the principle of triage & treat, in & out, every possibility covered as efficiently as possible. Most large cities have at least one hospital, usually in a poor area, with “Clinic” that utilizes this Fixed Cost idea: Monday/Wednesday is OB/Gyn; Tuesday is GP/Peds; and Thurs/Fri is procedure follow-ups including outpatient surgery, oncology, podiatry, etc. Plus, people know where their hospital is, and feel comfortable that all the other people waiting are just like them. The anonymity is soothing because the reason for their visit does not make them the center of attention, and they aren't reluctant to simply do what everyone else is doing,which is waiting, and if someone truly injured comes in, everybody accepts that that person goes first. Herd mentality has a calming affect, and frankly, it's cheaper too. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-24_303_hospitals_as_primary_care_providers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-24_303_hospitals_as_primary_care_providers.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash healthcare, hospitals, politics, humor no Fri, 13 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It's not like Obama started with the idea of, "Oh, let's make the insurance companies rich." He was a Single-Payer guy, but not one Republican would support him, which forced him to capitulate to a few corrupt Democrats in the pockets of the Insurance industry. Obama probably thought his plan would get changed later, at least I hope he did because what we have is destined to be worse than before. The insurance charade is a scam to make money, especially for the pharmaceutical companies. What we need is actual socialized healthcare, and what we have now only needs a minor adjustment to make it so: just add Medicare for anyone, not just The Old. Only a handful of Republicans would be enough to add this option. First, let people choose from whatever insurance plans they can afford, but anybody left over gets added to the Medicare roles. We already know what the numbers will be like from Britain's mix of public & private healthcare: the National Health Service, or NHS, Britain's equivalent to Medicare, covers 60% of the population while private insurance are the other 40%. That would triple Medicare's current enrollment but the system is already set up, and expanding capacity is not a big deal: Kaiser Healthcare is a good example. Unfortunately, simply adding Medicare to the options won't be a complete fix because cost containment is mostly on the backs of the doctors, but more serious, Medicare if financed through payroll deductions, and certainly needs to be changed to come out of the General Tax revenue because its cost is devastating to low-wage earners. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-22_302_a_quick_healthcare_fix.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-22_302_a_quick_healthcare_fix.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Obamacare, ACA, politics, humor no Wed, 11 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The monthly insurance premium for a 2-earner Middle Class 3-children family is about $2K/mo with $1000 deductible for the Silver Plan. If the family earns $120K a year, they don't qualify for an Obamacare subsidy, so with no employer footing the bill, regular families have difficulty affording it, and as premiums continue to increase during the next decade, Middle Class people will simply “opt out” of the system. They won’t have any healthcare, while Rich & Poor people get the best healthcare available in the world. Even Middle Class workers on company plans are at risk as those become increasingly expensive such that more-and-more Small Business owners also opt out. In fact, take-home wages seem to have stagnated in the past decade but if rising healthcare insurance premiums are included, wages have actually gone up. Worse, young workers will continue to have ever increasing Medicare deductions taken from every dollar of their income to give healthcare to The Old, while they have none themselves. Eventually, the Insurance Trust will be broken by an outraged Middle Class or Obamacare will be repealed, leaving costs ratcheted up AND no Universal healthcare. Less people will have healthcare than did before the whole Universal healthcare thing started. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-22_301_the_irony_of_universal_healthcare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-22_301_the_irony_of_universal_healthcare.mp3 2:08 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash universal healthcare, Obamacare, healthcare, politics, humor no Mon, 09 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Obamacare is health insurance not healthcare. Calling a thing something it isn't is disingenuous & dishonest: health “insurance” isn't even insurance. Insurance is when lots of people pay a little for an expensive event that rarely occurs, but EVERYONE needs good health. Insurance, as a business, makes money only when it delivers less than it receives in payments. They are actually in the business of limiting the thing they insure, in this case, healthcare, which needs the exact opposite goal. Also, insurance, as a business, requires a normal adversarial relationship with its customers, but that is not suitable for a public service. Mostly though, Obamacare's implementation of “insurance” is inequitable because the Middle Class bears the majority of the burden. The problem is the wild wealth inequity in the U.S. where 1% of the people own 40% of the wealth, which means that 60% of the nation's wealth is paying 99% of its healthcare costs. Even worse, half of those pay no healthcare costs at all, meaning the Middle Class must pay double of what is already a horrendous cost. The solution is to fully socialize healthcare, pay for it out of General tax revenues so that the burden is borne by all the wealth of our nation, not just people who work for a living. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-20_300_the_inequity_of_obamacare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-20_300_the_inequity_of_obamacare.mp3 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Obamacare, healthcare, health care, inequity, politics, humor no Thu, 05 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy America's healthcare costs are approaching 20% of its GNP. It's incongruently expensive because it's a natural monopoly, which means people have no choice in what they pay. How many ads do you see claiming lower prices for medical care? Where are the sales? Worse, in many situations consumers of healthcare have no choice whether to buy because their life literally hangs in the balance. When consumers have choice, like with elective surgeries such as Lasix and breast augmentation, prices are relatively cheap due to Market Pressures, but most of healthcare is not amenable to Market Pressure, there is no cost containment. For example, critical care is unpredictable, inconvenient & presents an insurmountable knowledge gap. This translates to inordinately high monthly insurance premiums due to lack of competition or market feedback. The people responsible for the lion's share of healthcare use, The Old, consume more from society than they produce. Basically, young people are working, not for themselves, but for supporting old people, it’s simple demographics. Universal healthcare can be easily demagogued: opponents rise the specter of "Death Panels," how doctors don't get paid enough, and how the U.S. already leads the world in medicine. These are distortions intended to return to dog-eat-dog healthcare, because in general, the opponents of Universal healthcare are the ones with retirement benefits, Medicare & the VA; who are self-interested because their place at the public trough is diminished if more people are allowed in. Americans don’t like to incur debts we can’t pay, so rather than receive needed medical attention and checkups, those who can’t afford it, go without, their quality of life suffering from nagging, untreated disabilities; finally, when their conditions worsen, they must seek medical attention and lose everything. Healthcare is a basic Right of every citizen, and people will surrender some of their liberty for it, just as they will for protection & jurisprudence. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-20_299_the_problems_with_healthcare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-20_299_the_problems_with_healthcare.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash healthcare, health care, politics, humor no Tue, 03 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy We've really savaged some misleading concepts about Government finances, let's review: Government bonds obligate someone else to pay for your debts: good for you, not good for someone else. The people who end up with government money must obviously be the ones to pay it back. Government employees are a huge block that votes in their own self-interest. Government pensions are government employees colluding with other government employees. Growing out of debt is economic magical thinking. Governments should be focused on economics, not accounting. Cities need bankruptcy the same reason that people do. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-18_298_government_finance_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-18_298_government_finance_concepts.mp3 1:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Government finance, politics,humor no Sun, 01 Oct 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Bankruptcy is in the U.S. Constitution for a very important reason, to let people start over again after bad judgment or bad luck put them into a position they can't realistically come back from. Cities need to declare bankruptcy for the same reason. However, some State governments are so captured by Public Employee unions that they've made it illegal to go bankrupt, or to even to modify pensions. Those States need to be allowed to totally crash, not get bailed out by the Feds, so that eventually the vested interests in charge get thrown out, and their laws get changed so that they can declare bankruptcy. Private citizens NOT responsible for generous public pensions of bankrupt municipalities. After a city goes bankrupt, whatever the Pension Guarantee Corp decides is reasonable & sustainable is what retired public employees get, the same as for bankrupt private pensions. Also, cities should not be able to obligate their taxpayers to long term bonds, all projects should be pay-as-you-go special levies, no longer than 5 years, the median duration of citizen's residency. Cities get into financial trouble because elected officials who borrow the money actually have no responsibility for repaying it, and no penalty if they don't: all gain, no pain. Maybe only the U.S. Supreme Court is going to be able to break the public employee stranglehold on municipal bankruptcy so that innocent private taxpayers are relieved from onerous public obligations, but without bankruptcy relief, productive citizens will vote with their feet, especially when service is declining and the environment is hostile, leaving only those who consume more than they produce in the bankrupt cities. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-18_297_bankrupt_cities.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-18_297_bankrupt_cities.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash bankrupt cities, politics, humor no Fri, 29 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Government has its own accounting rules that don't include pensions & other future obligations among their liabilities. Their illogic goes: legislators can always vote not to pay the benefits, therefore those debts don't really exist. That concept is factually true but it does mislead rational people into drawing the wrong conclusions about our nation's sustainability. There's also the salient fact that accounting is NOT economics. Accounting is making the assets equal the liabilities, while the goal of economics is to increase productivity to the point where people only have to work enough to maintain a Work Ethic, using the rest of their time to pursue personal achievements. The goal of Government should be economics, not accounting. From a simple accounting perspective, Government creates a debt spending money, which it tries to balance through taxation. The federal government can also create new money to pay its debts, and there's nothing wrong with that from an economic POV, though it causes accountants and Home Budget Balancers everywhere to go nuts. However, creating money has the downside of devaluing future assets, like pensions, so there's a lot of pushback from the vested interests, mostly people who are consumers of public largess rather than contributors to it, so the increasing productivity goal of economics means nothing to them, but it should mean something to their grandchildren. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-18_296_government_accounting_realities.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-18_296_government_accounting_realities.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash accounting, government accounting, politics, humor no Wed, 27 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Personally, I'm with Dick Cheney on one thing: deficits don't matter, but because all the economics most people understand is the erroneous assumption that it's something like balancing their home budget, demagoging politicians use the deficit stalking-horse to gin up outrage & condemnation. This has created a cottage industry of those self-same politicians offering hair-brained theories on how their pet-proposal will make those evil deficits magically go away, without any conscious effort. They say American will simply grow out of them, with the added side-advantage that The Rich will get richer. As obvious as it may sound, no one can tell the future. Since we can’t tell the future, all we can do is predict from past experience as engineers do. Engineers are partial to finding an equation that fits past data, plug in an unknown, and see if the results meet their expectations. For example, if engineers used U.S. budgetary data since Reaganomics kicked in during the early 1980s, they would expect the National Debt to continue to increase because it always has. Obviously, apologist economists, from either political Party, aren’t engineers because they say whatever swill they're selling will cause tax receipts to dramatically increase, taking care of all our budget woes. Never mind that during the roaring 1990s when America was awash with big money, there weren’t enough tax receipts. Never mind that no scenario in our past points to dramatic government revenue increases. Yet still, ideological-driven politicians put their fingers on their foreheads, closes their eyes, grimace sincerely, and tell us that everything is fine, we can depend on America “growing” out of its financial difficulties. Always the same proposed solution, always the same answer: a ballooning National Debt. But like I said, deficits don't matter, whatever causes the next economic collapse, it won't be federal bankruptcy. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-16_295_growing_out_of_deficits.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-16_295_growing_out_of_deficits.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash budget deficits, growing out of deficits, politics, humor no Mon, 25 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Government pensions are three-way unconscionable contracts where government employees collude with other government employees while putting the obligation on the taxpayer. To show how big a problem this is, consider that government pension obligations are equal to the total net worth of the United States. Also, the idea of government pension “reserves” is a laughable myth. The whole concept is disingenuous because “saving" is inapplicable when it comes to governments because they have no place to put the saved money, and since Government strains to balance budgets, the only way to pay pensions is to raise taxes. One of America’s founding premises, written into The Constitution, is that children are not responsible for the debts of their parents. Therefore, at a fundamental basis, Government pensions are violating the Constitutional intent because they certainly pass the debts of the elders onto succeeding generations. Allowing government pensions to bankrupt, plus a healthy dose of inflation, is the most likely solution to this nightmare scenario, but government pensioners can take perverse solace in the fact that the looming financial collapse will put private pensioners into the same situation. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-16_294_government_pensions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-16_294_government_pensions.mp3 2:06 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash government pensions, politics, humor no Sat, 23 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Government employees are defined by the fact that taxpayers are responsible for their salaries, and they are not subject to feedback through Market Pressures. So many people work for government, almost 15% of the labor force, well over 20 million people, that it's a significant voting block, and acts like one, especially the union aspect. It's easy to understand how democracy is distorted when one group has the power to make everyone else pay for them, and it's easy to understand why the ideology of most government employees is socialist, because the jobs they do are socialist in nature, and they are the very first beneficiaries of wealth redistribution. Government reeks of Marxist totalitarianism, but as long as we acknowledge that’s a problem, we can keep it more-or-less under control. Unfortunately, out of their own self-interest, government employees promulgate the false narrative that people working for government could get better jobs in the Private Sector but they remain in government out of a sense of moral sacrifice; not-withstanding the fact that government employees have better pay, ironclad job security, great benefits, little oversight, lots of vacation, and a light workload. Government jobs are the dreamjobs of socialists everywhere, directly threatening liberty & Capitalism. When the government employee voting block exceeds the rest of us, America's go-getter, get-rich mentality will succumb to the same malaise that engulfs the rest of the world because the warm blanket of socialism numbs ambition. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-14_293_government_employees.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-14_293_government_employees.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash government employees, politics, humor no Thu, 21 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Money is imaginary, just numbers in a computer. Every year Government spends the imaginary money. Someone who receives that money puts it in the bank which then loans 10x that amount of money to more people, who then buy things, and the people who get that money put it in the bank which loans out 10x as much, over-and-over, so that the original money multiplies itself. Government then asks for its original money back as taxes and we all win because life gets better and better, and some people accumulate more savings. As simple as that sounds, and as easy as it is to implement, the budget doesn't balance because almost everybody misunderstands what's going on, either because it's not explained well, or due to self-interest. As Upton Sinclair said, “it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”Assume the pretend money spent by Government is painted red, white & blue. It bounces around in the economy like a pinball machine, with each bounce generating new money, however, this new money is not painted red, white & blue. At the end of the year we all look in our bank accounts to see how much red, white & blue money we have so we can send it back to Government. Obviously, people without bank accounts have none of the red, white & blue money and people with big bank accounts have lots of it. It's not a matter of fairness, or ideology, it's simple math: if the people who get the red, white & blue money spent by government don't pay it back then there's a deficit. Worse, there is an ever-increasing money gap between them & people without savings. They are basically enriching themselves at the expense of everybody. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-14_292_government_deficits_explained.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-14_292_government_deficits_explained.mp3 2:50 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash economics, deficits, politics, humor no Tue, 19 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Government has no money. That simple fact seems to escape most people. The only money Government has is the money it collects from taxpayers. Anticipating that revenue, governments borrow money, proposing to pay it back from tax receipts; the government can bond taxpayers to private money-lenders, which is why the concept is called a “bond.” Just thinking about this concept for a moment reveals several egregious problems: first, there is no connection between who benefits from the money and who is obligated to pay it back; second, a significant chunk of the money is siphoned off by the Investment Banks that organize the bond; and third, no one is held accountable for bad borrowing decisions that affect everyone long-term. There is no logical solution except to take away government's ability to borrow money, meaning no more Government bonds. Government finances should be pay-as-you-go, much as they are now, a Ponzi scheme, and that’s okay as long as everyone goes into the scheme knowing what’s happening and plans accordingly. At the Federal level, there is no need to sell bonds, simply print money. At the State level, create an in-State exchange medium, like Electronic Benefits Transfer, that can be devalued as needed to ensure a Balanced Budget. Bonds are another example of pushing responsibility for the present into the future. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-12_291_government_bonds.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-12_291_government_bonds.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Government Bonds, politics, humor no Sun, 17 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the less talked about political concepts: Letting everyone vote in a large, diverse nation is not a positive thing to the side that loses. Voter Suppression is Stone-Age technologies like polling places & voting booths that are only open for short hours, with not enough capacity. Election Forecasting is more entertainment than facts. Helping people become free by spreading democracy is actually cover for geopolitical national self-interest. Political Parties have no ideology because their constituents are too diverse. Protesting has emerged as a method of preventing other people's Free Speech. Elected officials are mostly unqualified for the job they do but most voters don't care. The political Center can be easily deduced by averaging both ends. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-12_290_political_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-12_290_political_concepts.mp3 2:13 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor no Fri, 15 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Since most people don't have any political ideology except “what do I get?” and “don't change my life,” concepts like The Left & The Right are really only understood by wonks, and aren't a very accurate portrayal of political reality anyway. Usually the terms are used in the context of one side disparaging the other: The Left doesn't call itself “The Left,” too many negative connotations; ditto for The Right. The term people will voluntarily use to describe their own political affiliation is “The Center,” because they imagine the political spectrum is linear, and they don't want to be on either end, not extreme; in fact, they're snowflakes, unique in their own special way, neither The Left nor The Right. However, The Center has no formal definition; it can only be deduced by considering what the two ends are and going halfway. For example, The Left prefers to be governed by The State, a cabal of egalitarian mystics with the ability to tell the future, while The Right wants government by a Meritocracy, as determined by wealth, which comes as a reward from God for being righteous.The Left resists change due to inertia, bureaucracy, while The Right resists change due to maintaining status quo, conservatism. The Left believes the group always has precedence over an individual, Socialist, while The Right believes an individual always has precedence over the group, Libertarian. Actually, The Center is pretty easy to spot: they want it both ways. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-12_289_the_center.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-12_289_the_center.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash The Center, The Left, The Right, politics, humor no Wed, 13 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Any State is easily the equivalent in complexity, scope, and product delivery, to a major private-sector business. At the highest levels of a business, the management team is certainly upper-echelon quality-wise. “Qualified” people are easy to spot from their CVs. Of the 10,000s of resumes that pass through a business's Personnel department, only a small handful of MBAs, CPAs, attorneys, and other professionals ever even get a chance to interview, let alone receive the job of guiding a major concern through the trials and travails of dog-eat-dog capitalism. Simply put, unqualified managers are unacceptable to the stockholders. Not so much in politics...In a large part, our elected officials are not in the same class, quality-wise, as upper-level business managers: most candidates are, in general, unqualified in all senses of the word. Apparently few voters seem to care, even though you would think voters are the equivalent of stockholders, and would want the best people available to manage things that will directly impact their lives. But how many of the people in a State’s legislature could even get an interview at a business that requires the equivalent responsibility? How would the stockholders react to a business that hired personnel like those found in most legislatures? How are car salesmen & school teachers qualified to make financial & legal decisions that affect everyone? And why does no one care? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-11_288_qualified_vs_unqualified.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-11_288_qualified_vs_unqualified.mp3 2:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash qualified, unqualified, elected officials, politics, humor no Mon, 11 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Rudeness is not boldness; yelling your opinion in a crowded auditorium is not brave nor admirable; disrupting a gathering of people you don't agree with is not righteousness. Unfortunately, these actions carry the aura of protesting, but protesting should not occur at the expense of other listeners. The people whose time you interrupted were meeting in sincerity and with decorum, and you took advantage of their courtesy & their aversion to conflict. They weren't offering you a platform to express your opinions: you were not protesting, you were impinging on their Freedom of Association, and they certainly don't want to associate with you. In a Liberty Nation, where people are taught to be responsible for their own actions & respect the autonomy of others, rude behavior should have some check, but in reality, it doesn't. The only thing that allows society to function smoothly is the voluntary courtesy & acquiescence of everyone towards everyone else. It only takes a small number of the exploiters to ruin it for everyone, because when anyone is allowed to flaunt civility, everyone is. Without voluntary civility, our nation is only inches away from armed barricades & violence. The “protesting” of the past has become temper-tantrums in the present. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-11_287_protesting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-11_287_protesting.mp3 2:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash protesting, protests, politics, humor no Sat, 09 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Political Parties are nothing more than groups of Special Interests. They certainly have no common ideology even though both sides condemn the ideology of the other as if they did. In fact, progressives used to be Republicans, while Democrats were conservatives; it's all a matter of who has the most entrenched power. Today, the Democrats are a loose amalgamation of Collectivists, environmentalists, feminists & Liberals. Republicans are Holy-Rollers, business interests & Libertarians. This is the case because America's Two-Party system forces strange ideological bedfellows: people who would normally be at each other's throats must join in an enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend alliance to have any societal impact at all. The result is that Republicans & Democrats have no ideology because there is no way to bring all the competing ideas under one tent except to ignore them. Because every gathering would quickly disintegrate into internecine squabbling, it's an unspoken rule that ideological discussions are discouraged during formal meetings: they never discuss ideology except to talk past one-another, even at the grass-roots level. Of course, this reality of Party politics is completely contrary to what the majority of voters imagine; voters who are looking to their Party for ideological clarity, and instead are confronted by a schizophrenic wreck. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-08_286_party_ideology.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-08_286_party_ideology.mp3 2:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash ideology, political Parties, politics, humor no Thu, 07 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Spreading democracy around the world one coup at a time is an American trademark. Though the 1950s & 60s were the halcyon days: Reagan certainly made hay in Central America, both Bushes weren't too bad at it in the Middle East, and even Obama gets credit for Libya & Syria. There seems to be no place too ridiculously awful for America not to stick our fingers in, fueled by a lethal mixture of National Interest & sanctimony. The admirable goal of helping people become free is exploited for geopolitical maneuvering, too often becoming a blind pursuit of democracy without considering the circumstances nor consequences. Democracy is the only from of communal decision-making that accommodates liberty, and since most people conflate liberty with freedom, the quest for freedom has become a mandate for democracy, but that is an ill-advised conclusion as much as it's an erroneous syllogism: some societies just are not the democracy types: they have been indoctrinated with theocracy, or come from a Marxist past with no experience with being accountable for their own actions, and many are not even accustomed to making decisions for themselves. To them, when democracy is thrust from above by outside forces, it results in chaos & exploitation by the Elite, then their negative experience undermines true democracy emerging in their nation. Democracy has to come naturally or not at all. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-08_285_spreading_democracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-08_285_spreading_democracy.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash democracy, politics, humor no Tue, 05 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Predicting the future is fraught with downside, just ask anybody in Vegas. People rely on statistics as a way to legitimize their fortune-telling, and statistics do work in many situations, which has made them a tool of the exploiters: the people who leverage the credibility of statistics for their own self-interests. For example, there's electioneering forecasting; the tendency for news outlets to minimize the gap between candidates at the top of the ticket, particularly the presidency. It's in nobody's interest to report honestly on a presidential election if it's a lock for one side: for example, if a Democrat candidate has an insurmountable lead, and rank-n-file Republicans know that, they wouldn't show up at the polls, and that would affect all down-ticket Republican candidates, so we get a fabricated horserace based on tweaked election forecasts when in reality there was never any real contest, except in made-up numbers. But then there's the bizarre counter-example of Trump's election, when forecasters were entirely compromised by powerful vested interests to make Hillary's election seem inevitable, so that Republicans would stay home, and we all got to see how that turned out. That single exercise in manipulation has seriously undermined the status election forecasters once held, leaving no forecaster's reputation untarnished. Now, except in the most extreme cases where a candidate leads by 20 points, does anyone take a forecast seriously. Election forecasting has been relegated to entertainment. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-06_284_election_forecasting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-06_284_election_forecasting.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash election forecasting, politics, humor no Sun, 03 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy As American children, we are indoctrinated with the powerful mythology of voting, so every time we hear about someone trying to deny others the Right to Vote, we experience a visceral, almost irrational negative reaction. In fact, it's actually difficult for us to believe that people would be so selfish as to deny others the right to express their opinion, but that's because we all have a candy-coated view of society: the reality of voter suppression is much realer than any of us want to think. The most ubiquitous example of insidious voter suppression is continuing to use Stone-Age technologies like voting booths & polling places that are only open for one day, with limited capacity. Washington State lets us Vote-by-Mail for 2 weeks: Oregon too. But gerrymandering seems to be the most effective voter suppression strategy. Overt voter suppression, though it gets all the press, doesn't really play a big role in determining elections. Tactics like ID laws, citizenship & residency requirements only affect a tiny percentage of potential voters in most places. Even those regions with high concentrations of disenfranchised people, such as Illegal Immigrants, usually have voting populations with similar opinions, such as Hispanic immigrants living where there are lots of Hispanic voters, so the outcomes aren't affected much. And any election that turns on 1% of the vote was too close to be decisive anyway; random chance played a bigger role in determining the winner than any suspected voter suppression. Fake News & dirty tactics are much more effective. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-06_283_voter_suppression.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-06_283_voter_suppression.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash voter suppression, politics, humor no Fri, 01 Sep 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Over 250 years ago, America became the 1st modern democracy, the "Great Experiment," but true large democracies were not thought to be possible, primarily due to technology at the time. So far, things have worked out pretty well. Voting has the advantage of changing things that are subjective into something objective, and voting is an elegant way of negotiating outcomes based on simply yes-no questions, a truly beautiful concept. Special Interest groups often try to make their issues paramount so that they can take control, but the rest of us can counter that with our vote. Other positives of voting include: providing the most-liberty-to-the-most-people; preventing revolution by putting the onus onto people who don't vote, which are usually the ones who would do the revolting: if they can vote, and don't, it's harder to fuel their outraged indignation to the point of pitchforks & torches.; and there's also pride in voting. Obviously, voting has a plethora of positive consequences, however, the downside of letting everyone vote in a large, diverse nation is not a positive thing to the side that loses, so voting only decides things for now. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-04_282_voting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-04_282_voting.mp3 1:59 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash voting, politics, humor no Wed, 30 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Authority comes in many flavors, let's review the ones we've learned so far: You have no Rights except the ones you are willing to defend with violence. It's difficult to argue who is in charge with a man holding a gun. The People gave The State a monopoly on violence & they can rescind it. Paramount authority is in the eye of the beholder. Personal authority is the fountain from which all other authority flow. No one is more dangerous to liberty than an Elitist. Those in authority only have power over some of the people, some of the time. There's always a new crop of OWGs to take the reigns of authority. People show more allegiance to parochial control than to far off federal bureaucracies. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-04_281_authority_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-04_281_authority_concepts.mp3 2:06 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash authority, politics, humor no Mon, 28 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Most Americans do not like to give up their autonomy, the power to make their own decisions based on their personal set of values. When this country was founded, the 13 states united primarily to act in concert during their rebellion from Britain. The arguments for State’s Rights were measured against the strength achieved by subservience to a central uniting power. Though the U.S. Constitution is a marvelous piece of negotiation, it was really that the time and the place in history were just right for the creation of a new kind of political entity: the federal government is certainly an example of how the whole is stronger than the sum of the parts. However, the old feelings and arguments for autonomy and independence are still appealing, so-much-so that the single issue of parochial local control verses representative national control is the second most important distinction, right after the choice of individual rights verses group rights, that determines political ideology and affiliation. Parochial control is empowered by social conventions, tradition & patriarchy. It wields its authority via top-down commandments in a dictatorial manner with little or no counter-appeal from its constituency. In fact, in its organized forms, parochial control is essentially a Class hierarchy: a person is superior to members whose social status is below their own, and subservient to those above. Even seemingly benign expectations, such as playing golf, watching football, or drinking wine are subtle forms of parochial societal pressure. Parochial interests feel justifiably threatened by an overarching federal power to whom their only connection is a few elected politicians whose names they can’t remember. They feel that some remote, faceless bureaucracy should not dictate what they can and cannot do. Except for the undeniable success of federalism in guiding this nation to prosperity, the arguments against it would prevail. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-04_280_parochial_control.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-04_280_parochial_control.mp3 3:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash parochial, control, authority, politics, humor no Sat, 26 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Old White Guys have held authority in The West for centuries, and odds are they will maintain their hold on the reins, but challenges to their power are legion, fueled by democracy & Social Media. The resentment towards OWGs has been building for at least a generation. I wasn't aware of it when I was younger but maybe that was because I was young, or maybe it's a result of integration: Millennials, women & minorities, all the groups that traditionally have been excluded from the White-guy network, now want a piece. SJWs have integrated their disdain for OWGs into their ideology: they say that OWGs are the oppressors, so only they can be racist & sexist, that it's morally impossible for oppressed people to exhibit those traits. But Millennials are the absolute worst OWG-bashers because they're coming into the heat of their power, and resent the fact that due to the stagnant economy, improved health, and changing of social norms such that people can work until they drop, job openings for emerging talent have stagnated. But time reduces capability, and though OWGs hold authority based on past achievements, they eventually age out, only to be replaced by a new batch of OWGs. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-02_279_owgs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-02_279_owgs.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Old White Guys, OWGs, politics, humor no Thu, 24 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Waves of control-seekers ripple through society and through time. They can sometimes endure for decades, but most often their tenure can be measured in years then the coalition breaks down for all the reasons that any carefully balanced alliance disintegrates. U.S. politics is a prime example of small groups of people building power until they have their short day in the sun: Religious Right, Tea Party & currently the SJWs. The thing these groups all have in common is that they were able to mobilize a small cadre of true-believers, formulate a message that got traction if not acceptance, and get some positive press which propelled them into positions of power & authority, for a while anyway. Another thing these groups have in common is the hubris to think they can wield authority over all-the-people-all-the-time, but whenever an elite group tries to determine the outcome of very complex events, it always ends ignominiously. As we have seen over-n-over, the best anybody can ever accomplish in our diverse society is authority over the lives of some-of-the-people-some-of-the-time, and not a very long time at that. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-02_278_some_of_the_people_some_of_the_time.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-06-02_278_some_of_the_people_some_of_the_time.mp3 2:06 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash authority, politics, humor no Tue, 22 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Elitists are by very definition, people who think they should be in authority; that they are specially trained, or have exceptional mental capabilities, or are selected by god to be in control. Occasional, some arrogant person might actually live up to their high self-image, and these remarkable few provide cover for the vast majority of idiots who, if anything, are only marginally competent. No one is more pitiful & more dangerous than someone who thinks they're better'n you. The word “Elitist” is thrown around in different contexts but what people mean is the hubris, pretension & conceit of those who think they know what is best for others. Elitism is mostly the domain of the uniformed dictating to the gullible; those seeking internal gratification from the feelings generated by sanctimony & self-righteousness, and their indoctrinated followers. Luckily, people can usually be educated out of their elitist tendencies; it's the elitist power-hungry, control-seekers that are the danger to society. However, the worst kind of elitist is born that way, as their birthright for being part of the Nouveau Aristocracy; there is no better argument against a Class system than the elitism it inspires. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-31_277_elitist.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-31_277_elitist.mp3 1:49 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash elitist, elitism, politics, humor no Sun, 20 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It's true, the world does revolve around you, but that doesn't make you special because that's what everybody thinks. You are the paramount authority in your own mind, which is why you desire & deserve respect from others. You also expect your personal authority to remain sacrosanct as part of The Deal, that no one is going to be telling you what to do or how to think other than the guidance you consciously agreed to accept when you joined society. Personal awareness is the recognition of the fact that all people are their own sovereign; the very foundation of liberty. Most people live their insular lives in the satisfying knowledge that they wield sufficient personal authority because of what they do, their education, or their experience. People assume that others around them acknowledge this superior authority, but conflict arises when perceived spheres of authority overlap. Negotiating who is best to be in authority is a combination of personality and credibility, but in a liberty-based society, it usually works out to everyone's benefit. Problems occur when the people not chosen into authority positions reject their rejection, and vie for control anyway, or more often, refuse to abide by the dictates of the selected leaders, causing an eventual breakdown of society itself. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-31_276_personal_authority.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-31_276_personal_authority.mp3 2:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash authority, personal authority, politics, humor no Fri, 18 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There are many sources of authority: if you want Moral authority, you refer to your church; and legal authority is ensconced in the Judiciary; for authorities on commercial matters, you would ask someone from the business world; cultural authority comes from the ethnic group from which it derived; creative authority is reserved to artists; and the ultimate in authority is the violence embodied in the police & military. All of these groups vie for supremacy, but which is most important? Well, all sources of authority have some claim on the title of Most Important. For example, for a society to endure, it requires productivity, which would seem to indicate that commercial activity is of paramount importance, therefore, whatever it takes to maintain commerce has authority. However, right now, Moral authority via the SJW movement is in ascendance, but like all religions, it suffers the backlash from the people whose liberty they are impinging. Legal authorities can incarcerate you, even take your life, but the web of enforcement is thin & extended; it is unlikely that people will follow The Law simply because of threat of penalty. Cultural authority is the most subjective of all authorities, certainly it cannot be universally applied, and remains more an oddity rather than any fount of wisdom. And art is in the eye of the beholder, as ephemeral as the wind it is sometimes made of. Obviously, it's an interconnected relationship, so ask yourself which authority, if removed, causes the others to cease functioning or collapse? It's an authority that rarely gets mentioned, the authority from which all others derive... All external authority flows from your personal authority, because without a tacit agreement from you to adhere to the rules of society, there is no authority. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-30_275_paramount_authority.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-30_275_paramount_authority.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash authority, politics, humor no Wed, 16 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The number one rule in life is that violence is the ultimate arbitrator, and we intellectually know that unbridled violence will keep a society mired in degradation & oppression, completely forestalling any chance of personal liberty, therefore when America was founded, as part of The Deal, Americans relinquished their personal Right of Violence & gave The State a monopoly on it. So far, the transfer of power has delivered what we'd hoped; we live in a time of relative peace & plenty, where violence is an aberration, so distant from our daily interactions that most people think themselves insulated from it, that violence happens to other people, not them. While The State's Monopoly on Violence has the advantage of depersonalizing & almost completely mitigating it, like any monopoly, the danger of exploitation always lurks just ahead of our perception. For example, Special Interests, having no power of their own, have leveraged The State's almost limitless power, for their own selfish purposes; and, as another example, socialists fully intend for The State to impress their ideology on everyone via the pretext of justice, the thin veneer in which violence is often cloaked. This explains why half of Americans feel betrayed and apprehensive of government, and why they grasp their guns & join militias, because the primary ideal of America, which is liberty, is threatened by its primary defender, The State, as interests counter to liberty democratically capture The State's violent capacity. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-30_274_violence_of_the_state.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-30_274_violence_of_the_state.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash violence, The State, politics, humor no Mon, 14 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Since the source of liberty is Rights, and the ultimate source of all Rights, the head-of-the-Nile so-to-speak, is violence, it leads that things that increase the threat of violence also increase liberty. The obvious connection between having Rights & your ability to defend them with violence, specifically gun violence, is not lost on the people who would rather you had less individual liberty. How can they force you into their imaginings of a socialist State if you choose to instead point your gun, you and millions of others who believe like you. Rights mean different things to different people, and apparently people do not notice, nor care, if they never had a particular Right to begin with, or never used it. In fact, they may deny the Right exists at all, perhaps even arguing against it: an obvious example is the conflict around the Right to own guns. People are also belittled & chastised for exercising other Rights: the 1st Amendment Right to Free Speech is under serious attack from The Left, and the 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable search is already down the tubes. The last defense seems to be to draw-a-line-in-the-sand & fight or lose your Rights, and the 2nd Amendment is the ultimate guarantor of the ability to do that. In fact, the most insidious aspect of gun-grabber motivation is to take violence away from people who would use it to protect their Rights. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-29_273_guns_give_you_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-29_273_guns_give_you_rights.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Rights, guns, politics, humor no Sat, 12 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The mystique, almost worship, that has built up around America's Founders & the documents they created has reached religious levels of adulation. But America's Founders were not special, though they were all men, not a woman among them, and they were the Elites of the day; their greater-than-life attributes mostly the fabrications of history writers, their foibles forgotten. Actually, the American Revolution was inevitable, part of the evolution of government that could accommodate increasingly large populations. It happened in France next, and eventually, the same devolution of power to the people happened around the world, always accompanied by some kind of Rights, but the insulation of time has obscured the reality that Rights are a social fabrication; most people simply do not have the self-awareness to imagine otherwise, so they engage in dogma & magical-thinking about Rights. You have no Rights: there are no natural rights, no human rights, no God-given rights, nothing. The simple fact is there is no mystical origin of Rights. Rights are only bestowed on you by people willing to commit violence. This misunderstanding stems from the most basic truism about life & society, that violence is the ultimate arbitrator. Your Rights come from an implied quid pro quo contractual relationship with other people not to commit violence on you and visa versa. They, in essence, become your allies not your enemies. Without allies, you would be a slave or dead, but for some reason people are not taught this. They just assume others will kowtow to their self-interested desires because of “Rights,” and you know, when people assume something, they take “u” and “me” out of the word and are just left with "ass.” Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-29_272_you_have_no_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-29_272_you_have_no_rights.mp3 2:48 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Rights, politics, humor no Thu, 10 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review how biological sex dominates politics: Feminism has morphed from admiration into exploitation. The double-standard exists because special treatment is not voluntary relinquished. Women want to be able to pick & choose whose attention they attract. Yes-Means-Yes further exacerbates the already extraordinary imbalance of women's sexual power over men. The penalties for rape are pathologically vengeful. Transgender people seek to subvert the politics of biology for their own selfish aims. Title IX turns sports into politics. Alpha Males are evolutionarily important. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-29_271_sexuality_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-29_271_sexuality_concepts.mp3 1:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sexuality, politics, humor no Tue, 08 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The measurable traits we associate with males: aggression, competitiveness, anger, body mass & sex drive, are due to high levels of testosterone. By puberty, males are forcibly made aware of any physical & mental deficiencies they may have at the hands of those stronger and smarter than themselves; it's evolutionary that a pecking order emerges. In a testosterone setting, it takes an Alpha to manage other aspiring Alphas, otherwise disrespect will damage the group's cohesion. Sports are certainly subject to this, and it's definitely part of the military mystique. Alpha males spontaneously emerge in any social setting of men. The manifestation is somewhat muted in a mixed-gender gathering, but that's more the imposition of artificial societal limits: rest assured, in a predominately male environment, Alpha males rule. Alpha malehood isn't even consciously sexist: men will certainly kowtow to females as long as the females exhibit Alpha traits. Alpha males got us to where we are today, and the fact that modern society has come to denigrate the Alpha male prerogative, causes us all to suffer because of it. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-29_270_alpha_males.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-29_270_alpha_males.mp3 2:08 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Alpha males, politics, humor no Tue, 08 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Feminism arguably jumped-the-shark with their advocation of Title IX, the federal law that forces public schools to have "equal" sports facilities for both sexes, or none at all. Not only is this vindictive in nature, but organized sports violate The Left's ideal of egalitarianism because only physical elites participate. Does The State really need to be preventing gender-based discrimination in athleticism? Imagine if AP classes, which are notoriously gender imbalanced, were similarly held hostage; and doesn't the idea of transgenderism totally undermine the entire concept: how can there be any distinction between “mens” & “womens” basketball or tennis? This erstwhile battle of the sexes is totally unnecessary because sports are not worth the divisory politics they cause. In fact, sports serve no real purpose in society; they are simply entertainment. Why sports are even part of public schooling is open for debate, especially since some schools don't even offer sports. Why public money is spent on sports defies logic: religion holds a similar place in the America psyche, yet belief in the supernatural is not forcefully gender-balanced by The State. Sports are vanity, not important in life or achievement. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-29_269_title_ix.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-29_269_title_ix.mp3 2:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Title IX, Title 9, feminism, sports, politics, humor no Fri, 04 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Any cell of the human body has a clear biological sexual distinction, it's called the y-chromosome, and it controls the testosterone that turns a physically female fetus into a male. There are several kinds of hormonal anomalies that can happen: testosterone receptors not functioning, testosterone can't be converted from estrogen, etc. that create anatomic-females that have y-chromosomes. Sometimes these anomalous people don't even find out about their condition until they see a gynecologist about pregnancy. There are also similar female hormonal abnormalities that exhibit as males. These rare instances of transsexualism are based on physical science, so medical decisions can be made from an objective basis. However, “gender identity,” as opposed to “sexual identity,” is when a person of obvious physical sexuality insists they are of the opposite gender, or even no gender at all. It's their attempt to subjectify something objective, and thereby gain control because only they can determine how society treats them. In fact, "Gender Dysphoria" is a recognized mental illness per se; this makes "gender identity" first & foremost a psych problem. The fact that some people treat it with surgery to become transsexuals doesn't change anything, just like Abasiophiliacs & ‎Apotemnophilias, people who want appendages cut off, aren't "cured" when the offending appendage is indeed removed. There are also societal impacts of allowing people to overrule science: for example, the recent trend of female sports being dominated by transgenders: if anyone can join, what's the purpose of having leagues separated by sex in the first place? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-28_268_transgender.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-28_268_transgender.mp3 2:42 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash transgender, gender dysphoria, politics, humor no Wed, 02 Aug 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The most egregious miscarriage of justice is the penalty for what is essentially a biological imperative of men only a few years out of childhood, who have yet to develop any wisdom or foresight, and whose bloodstreams are a curdled mix of hormones, yet have their lives ruined by an abstract societal definition called “rape.” Westerners, especially women, have a conditioned reaction to rape that is out of all proportion for a crime where the harm is almost entirely psychological, if there actually is any harm. Even more ridiculous is Statutory rape where puritanism overrides logic, and boys are labeled as sexual predators for what is little more than experimentation. The other scenario of rape is testosterone-related, where dominate males attempt to subjugate others through fear. Men get raped too for that reason. For dominance rape the penalty is absolutely draconian, rationally related to nothing except vengeance. Do we really have a situation where the victim would rather have had their tooth knocked out than be raped? Even intentionally cutting off someone's finger does not come close to the penalty for rape, certainly not the life-long stigma. The concept of rape is emotional, a vestige of religious indoctrination, highly suspect, clearly overwrought, yet never addressed in a rational fashion because it's one of the things democracy cannot deal with. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-28_267_rape.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-28_267_rape.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash rape, politics no Mon, 31 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Society's primary purpose is to perpetuate itself, and that goal mandates childbearing, which is why the specter of sex has an out-sized affect on humanity's psyche, not just now but throughout history. Ensconced in religion, sex is the source of much shame, shunning, and sanctimony. Sexual crimes, especially ones that put inheritance or honor at risk, have always been overly scrutinized, with penalties far out of proportion to what the simple act of rubbing skin-on-skin might entail. Feminists have exploited this emotional weakness in humans to their own benefit in pursuit of more control. No other implied social contract is so fraught with so much legal danger, especially for young people who aren't even considered to have wisdom enough to drink alcohol. The current incarnation of sexual brow-beating is the Yes-Means-Yes campaign. Yes-Means-Yes is a bilateral "yes to sex" contract that must be signed beforehand by persons who may engage in sex. No Second-base, Third-base, hoping for a Home-run, men now have to get a signed agreement beforehand. As an attorney, I was thinking of providing a free click-through User Agreements for smartphones that all college kids can sign at the beginning of each term that specifies how many times in a weekend the parties can engage in anal, oral & vaginal sex, the expectation of culmination & whether the receiving party must spit or swallow. But, as it turns out, there is already an app available that validates through proximity so that potential pairs anticipating sexual activity need only tap their iPhones together before doing the nasty. Kids are way ahead of me when it comes to sex, which is what causes the problem in the first place. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-27_266_yes-means-yes.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-27_266_yes-means-yes.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sex, yes means yes, politics, humor no Sat, 29 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Regardless of the Independence trope presented by feminists, the majority of women still seek attention from their peer group, and especially from men. They wear clothes that emphasize their sexuality, and adorn themselves with make-up & jewelry whose origins stretch back into ancient times, with no other utility except the one programmed by society to be alluring for sex. However, women want to simultaneously exploit their sexual prowess to attract attention then pick-n-choose who's attention they receive. Woman assume that the Violence-of-the-State will protect them in situations where the desires of testosterone-influenced men are in ascendance, then get outraged when things go sideways. It's not like folks don't understanding what's going on; the very reason that Islamic women wear burkas is to blunt such instincts, yet indignant females think sanctimonious words & tough crime penalties are enough to forestall millions of years of male evolutionary dictates, and hormonal override. This is a method of control, and a discourtesy towards men, which also violates their liberty because their attention has been intentionally captured without quid pro quo. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-27_265_attention-seeking_women.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-27_265_attention-seeking_women.mp3 2:03 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash attention, feminism, politics, humor no Thu, 27 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Children are taught: what is good for the goose is good for the gander, and this indoctrination easily morphs into support for the feminist movement, but SJWs are not promoting symmetry between the sexes, they are advocating women get treated preferentially. They use words like “equal” rather than “same,” and they define what “equal” means, denying there is a double-standard. They think they can bury the consequences of their aims in endless, ridiculous, sanctimonious, denier logic. They suggest double-standards are needed because women are quiet, courteous & kind, easily interrupted or ignored in the brutal & uncouth world of men. They even have derogatory terms for it like “man-splaining,” and Smartphone apps like “Girl Interrupted” that purport to measure the brutishness of men; OR, women play the victim card: discrimination against women in the past requires reparations from men today; OR, they simply state that women are superior to men and therefore the goose is special. The dichotomy of people who want Equal Rights but don't want the same treatment is not only illogical, it is inimical to liberty because the gain of one is at the expense of another. 60% of Medical School & Law School admissions & two-thirds of Graduate School admissions are women. The Law still has preferential treatment for women, if not in the letter then in the cultural predisposition of judges & jury members. Also, Marxist males support a double-standard so they can feel sanctimonious & superior to Capitalist males. All of these examples are as destructive to society as when the numbers & feelings about sex were reversed. In modern America, when the pronoun "she" has an affect on the outcome, it better be something biological. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-27_264_double-standard.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-27_264_double-standard.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash double-standard, politics, humor no Tue, 25 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The word “feminism” still benefits from the association with what it used to be. In the past, feminism was the umbrella of woman's suffrage, property ownership, work discrimination, and basically a throwing off of the religious restrictions that women had been bridled with for millennium, but like all vested interests, the momentum of feminism has morphed into a control-seeking monstrosity, and the “equality” aspect of modern feminism is undisguised Marxism. Also, the animosity towards men, misandry, inherent in modern feminism is no less virulent than animosity towards women, misogyny, they claim is the enemy that defeated Hillary Clinton. We want to like feminism because of what it was but that's dangerous because of what it's become. Calling someone a Feminist now has similar negative connotations attached to labels like White Nationalist. The women's movement is further diluted by those claiming they identify with women though their biology is male. The reason women ever even needed a movement is because their anatomy, specifically child-bearing combined with less testosterone, put them at a disadvantage in power politics. But men claiming to be women do not have that physical burden to overcome, nor were they raised in an environment of expectations shaded by hormonal instability. These males-claiming-to-be-women are capitalizing on the leverage that females have only relatively recently managed to achieve: all the exploiting, none of the exploitation. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-27_263_feminism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-27_263_feminism.mp3 2:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash feminism, politics, humor no Sun, 23 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Age Discrimination may be illegal but it is certainly fashionable. Social Justice Warriors exploit society's collective courtesy & charity. Having a Safe Space means you get to unilaterally make the rules. Sanctimonious Superiority is mental masturbation masquerading as moral indignation. Exploiting someone's courtesy is the same as disrespecting them. All cultures are not equal, and anyone who says they are denigrates our culture. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.]]> Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-26_262_social_justice_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-26_262_social_justice_concepts.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Social Justice Warriors, SJW, politics, humor no Fri, 21 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The idea that all cultures are equally valuable requires denigrating your own culture and ignoring the failings of others. This equalization of cultures is a sanctimonious ideological expression rather than a statement of fact, and is only possible in a centrally-controlled society where small groups of people manage to get their hands on the levers of power. A simple burkas vs. bikinis comparison shows that if cultures are too diverse, conflict will naturally exist: can a bikini society, one steeped in liberty and individual Rights, coexist with a restrictive patriarchal culture that believes in stoning women who have affairs? Someone from another culture may not even be able to be allies because neither is willing to sacrifice their liberty for the other. Culture must be indoctrinated into children: if women are not indoctrinated to remain subservient to men, they won't remain so; if men are not indoctrinated to monogamy, they will not be; and if children are not taught that they are responsible for their own actions & no one else's, they will expect to be taken care of as adults. The homogeneity of a society plays a big part in its endurance: people who think, act & play alike tend to continue to do so. Diverse societies are ones with wildly divergent cultures, for example: theism vs. atheism, work ethic vs. sloth, liberty vs. totalitarianism, or even something as simple as speaking a different language can & will drive in wedges that will eventually split into multiple homogeneous-cultured societies, rather than the heterogeneous one Americans have traditionally enjoyed. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-26_261_other_cultures.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-26_261_other_cultures.mp3 2:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash culture, diversity, politics, humor no Wed, 19 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Americans are indoctrinated with the moral imperative, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” and treat social interactions in a quid pro quo fashion, which in a liberty society makes courtesy an implied contract, a marketable expectation, for example, your place in line. On-the-other-hand, socialist-leaning nations assume courtesy is owed to them, and exhibit a cavalier attitude towards it, manifesting in what Americans consider rudeness, such as intercepting food servers & monopolizing resources such as a guide or concierge. Conversely, socialists think Americans are the ones being rude by insisting on compliance with first-come-first-serve. The Deal we American allies have with one another includes respect for ourselves & others. Since it's hard to respect people you don't know, and you don't know most people, we substitute in courtesy: you keep to yourself, don't impinge on anybody's personal space, and they'll do the same for you. It doesn't seem like such a big sacrifice, we've been doing it for centuries, however, any mechanism that does not provide feedback can be exploited: if someone abuses your's or everyone's courtesy, there is no punishment or accountability of any kind. Shunning has no impact, and often the exit solution is blocked, so there you are, getting harangued in a public space, the fabric of society slowly tearing apart, and you are helpless to prevent it; The Deal is being violated. When one part of the Deal is violated, the whole deal is compromised. This is what's happening in America and in the world today: lack of simple courtesy will bring war to us all. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-26_260_exploiting_courtesy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-26_260_exploiting_courtesy.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash courtesy, politics, humor no Mon, 17 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Sanctimonious superiority is easy to muster, and provides one the opportunity to bask in the glory of moral indignation, but it's primarily practiced by fools, because anyone with the least bit of self-awareness would recognize the risk they're taking with irony, if not outright hypocrisy, when they feel morally or intellectually superior to others. Sanctimonitude comes from believing everyone has the same value system you do, that your ideas & concepts are universal, and if other people don't share in your delusions then they are simply stupid, greedy or ignorant of the true facts. Sanctimodes think they are the arbitrators of what is positive & good. Because the feeling of sanctimonious superiority gives immediate self-pleasure, it's a kind of mental masturbation, and many people will perform it over-n-over in their daily lives, as much a vice as anything physical. Emerging sanctimodes learn it from those around them, so it especially festers in churches and civic organizations that people join because of a lack of understanding, commitment & harmony in their own life. The School-of-Hard-Knocks seems to be an effective counterbalance to sanctimonious behavior but you have to have the courage to respond to the sanctimodes: confront those who act condescendingly towards you because allowing yourself to be demeaned will only embolden them. And heaven forbid, if you personally feel a sense of sanctimonious superiority welling in your own breast, practice self-control & beat that base beast back into the primeval id from which it emerged. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-15_259_sanctimonious_superiority.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-15_259_sanctimonious_superiority.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sanctimonious superiority, humor, politics no Sat, 15 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy When did this "Safe Space" concept, which implies other spaces are unsafe, creep onto center stage? Safe Spaces seem to be a mechanism for creating ever-constricting spheres of special access around select individuals, both breeding a sense of elitism inside the protected area, and fostering resentment in those excluded. There's a reason segregation is discouraged in America: Black-only clubs create just as much societal conflict as the White-only ones. And of course, eventually any such artificial identification gets exploited for someone's own personal benefit. Like all the other new vernacular coming out of college campuses and other public facilities; terms like “microaggressions,” “trigger warnings” & “hate speech,” language is being used to distort the existing power structure. It's also used to physically enforce Group Think: if you do not act & speak exactly as instructed, you are barred from the Safe Space, which could be a classroom, dining hall, and even extend to student newspapers; claiming “Safe Space” is literally being used to stifle Free Speech and block people with opposing views from speaking on campuses, physically attacking them even. Anyone GenX or older was indoctrinated with the admonition to “deal with it,” so we falsely assume everyone knows that liberty requires maturity acquired through introspection & self-awareness, but Safe Space works against personal responsibility, instead casting blame onto others for being mean to you. And since the definition of a “Safe Space” is provided unilaterally by the people who want to exploit it, it can mean anything they want it to mean, which of course, was its whole intent in the first place: to gain control. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-15_258_safe_space.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-15_258_safe_space.mp3 3:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash safe space, humor, politics no Thu, 13 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There's a reason that SJWs are people who traditionally have no power or authority: kids, women, minorities; because the concept of Social Justice actually gives them the advantage. If someone owes you, you are in control, so SJWs simply redefine society in a way that makes them the beneficiary of the obligation. These same people have nothing to lose & everything to gain by doing things that would ostracize conscientious citizens from polite society, and the physical consequences of exploiting society's collective courtesy & charity are almost non-existent to those who have nothing to lose. The reality is that you can't hold irresponsible people responsible. SJWs also do it for themselves because sanctimony & self-righteousness feels good. I know this because otherwise I would have to believe that SJWs have a special insight, maybe a direct connection to God, that tells them what justice they should pursue & how to accomplish it. I would have to believe SJWs understand all the ramifications of everyone's actions, can read people's minds, and can decide what is best for everyone. I would have to believe that SJWs are put on this earth to chastise my evil ways, and that they have the authority, knowledge & experience to tell me what to do. Since none of these things seem like reasonable assumptions, SJWs must just be in it for themselves, like the rest of us. Unfortunately, in this battle for power, SJW tactics are quite effective, especially since they have spent years infiltrating government, and so have the leverage of bureaucracy at their beck-n-call, financed with public money through public programs. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-13_257_social_justice_warriors.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-13_257_social_justice_warriors.mp3 3:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Social Justice Warriors, SJW, politics, humor no Tue, 11 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Age discrimination is the most prevalent & most virulent from of illegal discrimination in America, yet it gets almost no airtime. It's fashionable to hate-on OWGs, everyone under 40 does it. OWGs are commonly the villains in cartoons, job applicants over 50 are automatically eliminated from consideration, and startups openly advertise how young their employees are. Age Discrimination is the ultimate example of color-blindness because ageists are too busy looking at the grey to notice skin color. Tellingly, Middle-aged White men in the Rust Belt who lost their jobs to off-shoring, are actually accused of having “privilege” by The Left so must line up behind oppressed groups of people for sympathy & assistance, and that's why Donald Trump won in those traditionally Democrat districts, because of tin-eared New Racists-ageists. The resentments & animosities young people feel toward older generations was only prevented in the past by indoctrinating our young with the refrain, "respect your elders." In modern society, with that restraint gone, the common enemy of the activist young are Baby-Boomers. Watch any of the popular, post-apocalyptic TV shows, there are no old people, and what few remain are burdens on the young survivors. AntiBoomerism is real & it's only going to get worse as the burden of supporting them in their old age stifles all other aspects of society. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-13_256_age_discrimination.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-13_256_age_discrimination.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash age discrimination, ageism, politics, humor no Sun, 09 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It's human nature to form resentments, and history proves that grudges & slights are inter-generational, enduring for many, even hundreds of years. Whenever society has a shift in power & control, old complaints and past feuds will surface as segments of the population gain influence. In modern times, this was precipitated by the one-man-one-vote aspect of democracy. However, those special interest groups are still in a minority so they band together in the-enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend, defining the majority as the common oppressor enemy, and themselves as the oppressed victims. Why? Because victimhood has special privileges: first-n-foremost, it reverses responsibly of one's negative actions onto someone or something else while retaining ownership of positive actions, a win-win situation for victims. Secondly, perversity & vindictiveness provides their own emotional rewards regardless of logic. And giving the whole victimhood strategy additional momentum, many non-victims revel in their own sanctimonious & self-righteous thoughts; there's even a masochistic aspect of victim enablers, a kind of perverse mental masturbation. Perhaps it has always been that way, victimhood certainly strengthens the social fabric of some minority communities & fraternities, but it's more likely that social media has taken what was once a pitiful & rare occurrence, and made it mainstream. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-11_255_victimhood.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-11_255_victimhood.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash victimhood, humor, politics no Fri, 07 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In the not so distant past, women were physically weaker, less aggressive, often pregnant & stayed home to care for children. In modern times, through democracy, those disadvantages were turned into advantages, and once democracy had proven its usefulness, women recognized it could also be used to remedy past grievances, and promote future ones. Simultaneously, the testosterone-based advantages that men once had were demonized by women using feminized media to define what was good & civilized, and what was to be discouraged. This reversal of control has resulted in that whatever sexism used to be, it is now de facto discrimination against men. Since society's primary purpose is to perpetuate itself, this reverse sexism does have a kind of logic: raising children is difficult and was primarily a function of women. Society needs children, so for society to succeed, it needs to subsidize children & move men into the child-rearing roles once dominated by women. This is an example where society is in direct conflict with liberty, specifically men's liberty: modern society increases the liberty of women, but at the expense of men. The amount of liberty & sexism remains constant, it's simply redistributed: liberty transfers from men to women, with sexism flowing back. Women have found claims of sexism to be very effective, and have increased their volume. If men do not resist in kind, society will become increasingly more sexist towards men. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-11_254_sexism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-11_254_sexism.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sexism, humor, politics no Wed, 05 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Somewhere along the way, whatever my generation thought racism was, it has become completely re-imagined. The term “racism” is now a blunt instrument used to force relinquishment of control by the majority into the hands of the minority, and it's successful because we as a people are too courteous & frightened of social conflict to fight back. Granted, the entire power-of-the-State seems to be poised like the Sword of Damocles over society's neck, threatening social, reputational & financial annihilation of anyone disputing the new racial narrative, but that seems more like intimidation than actual threat because the Supreme Court of the United States, at least, seems to solve these issues justly whenever a case actually gets into their purview. Mostly, Cry Racism's power is coming from social media bleeding over into the mainstream media, assisted by a cabal of the-enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend allies where Old White Guys are the enemy. It seems likely that the real “racists,” as the word is used today, are the people who insist that skin color should confer special treatment, accommodation & reparations for past injustice, becoming, in fact, the New Racists. The old way of avoiding racism was to consciously examine your prejudices to make sure they were not irrationally swaying your thoughts & treatment of another person, but now the New Racists reject the idea that people can make decisions for themselves & be responsible for their own actions; the New Racists contend that all people, specifically White people, are born racist, and act subconsciously & instinctually racist, so cannot control themselves. This cynical condemnation of human nature is actually a ruse to gain control. New Racists, by denigrating your ability to exercise personal liberty, make the case that only THEY are capable of determining what is best for everyone. The ruse is as transparent as it is disgusting. Next time you hear the racist trope, don't be so courteous. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-09_253_racism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-09_253_racism.mp3 3:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash racism, politics, humor no Mon, 03 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy American was built by immigrants, wave after wave of people from different lands & cultures. Until relatively recently, all of those various traditions & social customs combined together into a heterogeneous homogeneity, that used to be termed "the melting pot." This integration of segregation was for a long time one of the prides of America, but the future appears to be a segregated integration, and it's called “diversity.” Diversity is the cover word Special Interest groups use to get things to be their way. They use the violence-of-the-State as a counter-force against the majority, with the destruction of America's existing social fabric their goal. Diversity is divisive: the wider the schisms the Special Interests create, the more control they can obtain. How did minority interests get so powerful? The coalescing power of the Internet, the willingness to abuse the courtesy of others, and the fact that everyone is not equal in the voting booth when the other side doesn't show up. Linguistics & rhetoric are their primary weapons, and they exploit the envy, spite & resentment of the left-behind young against the status quo of the old. Social media is their battleground & indoctrination of the impressionable is their long-term strategy. All public institutions reek of their corrupting influence, especially education & social services. At the moment these forces of divergence are winning, and unless The Majority organizes against them, the future will bring factionalism like nothing the U.S. has seen since the Civil War. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-09_252_heterogeneity_vs_diversity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-09_252_heterogeneity_vs_diversity.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash diversity, politics, humor no Sat, 01 Jul 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the more obscure economic realities: Economic cycles are an excuse to predict the future. Inflation is the Bogeyman of The Rich, and Fairy Godmother of The Poor. Quantitative Easing is the primest example of Welfare for The Rich. Monetarism provides cover for The Wealthy to amass more wealth. The Gold Standard is buggy-whip economics. Bitcoin's primary purpose is to evade taxes & buy contraband. There is no such thing as price gouging in a Market Economy. Elite pricing is another way The Rich are subsidized by the rest of society. How come no one ever talks about why the Underground Economy exists? You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-07_251_economic_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-07_251_economic_concepts.mp3 2:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash economics, liberty, politics, humor no Thu, 29 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Even people who have no contact with the shadowy figures who subsist outside government interference estimate the Underground Economy at 12% of GNP, but that's not including illegal activities like drugs & prostitution which add another 5%, and most Illegal Aliens work underground, estimated to be 11 million workers, an additional 5%; so roughly, that conservatively puts the Underground Economy at around 20% of all business done in the United States. That means the Underground Economy is huge, employing 10s of millions of people, and operating entirely outside the jurisprudence system. There are whole districts in many States where the economy is almost entirely underground. What of the children inside the Underground bubble? Even if they are taught respect for government & The Law in school, that message is totally undermined by their reality at home, ensuring an Underground Economy in perpetuity. What causes an Underground Economy? Minimum Wage laws, unions, onerous licensing, and all the other gate-keeping mechanisms vested interests use to limit competition, and make themselves more comfortable. Is there a solution? No, not until the burden of taxation & fees is lifted from the backs of The Poor; things like Medicare, Social Security, Unemployment & Workman's Compensation, which should all be paid out of general tax receipts, not payroll. Also, reduce the regulations that restrict aspiring entrepreneurs; like safety, environmental & handicap access; all of which cater to people who already have jobs & money. We also have to ensure tighter border control so that scofflaws do not stream into the U.S. Unfortunately, these things seem like impossible backward steps to socialist thinkers, so the Underground Economy is only going to get bigger. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-07_250_underground_economy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-07_250_underground_economy.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash underground economy, politics, humor no Tue, 27 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In a public environment, every time there is some additional fee that gives people faster access or some other elite treatment, that fee should be set by dividing the entire cost of the service by the number of Elites willing to pay the fee. For example, if there is elite-treatment for a public asset such as a highway that has special lanes for people who pay higher tolls to go faster than everyone else, the cost of the go-fast toll must be computed as if those elite people were the only ones using the asset. That way the Elites are not underpaying just because everyone else is covering the basic service. It's a classic example of The Rich being subsidized by everyone else. Progressive tax brackets should be computed the same way: the cost of the National budget is divided by the number of people in the bracket as if only they were paying. It's objective math, neither progressive nor regressive, and has nothing to do with fairness, equality, or any other subjective word. This concept should not be applied to private business because they respond to Market Pressures that will dictate the elite price; but public services, by definition, should NOT be Market driven, but instead must evenly distribute liberty. Uniform liberty can exist in a society with wide wealth disparity but only if The Rich subsidize everyone else, not the other way around, otherwise the disparity continually increases until society fractures along de facto Class boundaries. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-07_249_elite_pricing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-07_249_elite_pricing.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash elite pricing, liberty, politics, humor no Sun, 25 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Price gouging is illegal in 34 States. It's tough arguing on the side of price gouging: suppose someone in a boat finds a family stranded on their roof for 2 days, and won't pick them up until they give everything they have, maybe even a nubile young daughter. Yes, extortion is profitable, and somewhere there's a line between abducting a child for ransom verses letting them die because the victim can't afford the cost the price gouger is charging for insulin. However, most purchase decisions are easy: buy some ice for 10x the price, or continue to sweat. There's no reason a person who braved driving a truck full of generators into a ravaged area shouldn't get whatever they want to charge. Price gouging works for everyone, though there is a lot of resentment on the part of the buyer, but if gas costs $20 gallon, that's still cheap by bottled-water standards, and you're only going to buy as many gallons as you absolutely need, leaving some for the next guy who might be more distressed than you are. Religious socialism has clouded people's judgment, instigating moral outrage & condemnation, where they should be expressing relief & gratitude, so laws are passed to prevent “gouging.” Other proffered solutions are meant to be egalitarian but only end up being counter-productive: vouchers just create a Black Market, and rationing insures everyone purchasing “their fair share” will make the commodity disappear even faster than if there was no emergency. As odious as it may seem to the sanctimonious, Market Forces are the most efficient way to let an emergency resolve itself. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-05_248_price_gouging.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-05_248_price_gouging.mp3 2:41 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash price gouging, politics, humor no Fri, 23 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Bitcoin is imaginary money NOT controlled by government. Its primary appeal is to people who want to evade taxes, or buy cocaine. Bitcoin's promoters claim they save money by eliminating Third Party fees, but Credit Cards are actually a means to loan money to people who don't have it, fees are of a secondary concern to them. Plus, for the segment of the population who have some money, Credit Cards are a convenience without a downside because they actually protect you from thieves & rip-offs, and it costs nothing for that protection. Merchants like credit cards because it brings sales from people who need to borrow money. Certainly, except for shady folks who only want to deal in cash, nobody but ideologues, bootleggers & Venture Capitalists are clamoring for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is also cited as a stability hedge against inflation but if you know anything about Bitcoin, you know how unstable it is. Not only does the price fluctuate wildly, but in the carefully balanced artifice that is the World's economy, Bitcoin exists at the top of the pyramid, and will be one of the first things that come crashing down in hard times. What military is going back Bitcoin when The Collapse comes, and no nation is going to let their social safety net fail while elites blithely logon to their Bitcoin account in Shanghai so they can buy caviar. Bitcoin is a solution solving no problem, its implementation suspect, and its promoters bordering on charlatanism. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-05_247_bitcoin.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-05_247_bitcoin.mp3 2:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash bitcoin, politics, humor no Wed, 21 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Because money is imaginary, it can be exploited by people who understand how it operates. To prevent the connected, the privileged, and the unscrupulous from debasing the concept of money, conscientious people tried to institute stopping measures, of which the Gold Standard is the most famous. Theoretically, there can be an unlimited supply of money, as long as productivity exceeds consumption, but in practice, the creators of the imaginary money, governments, use it to reward insiders rather than to build an economy. In response, to limit the supply of money, it was tied to how much gold there was in the world. This was almost a random selection and it worked psychologically & practically for a while back-in-the-day, but make no mistake, there is no connection between real gold & imaginary money, and in fact, in an imaginary digital world, gold is no longer practical nor psychologically important, so any discussion of using it as a “standard” is Buggy-whip territory. The Gold Standard was Stone Age economics, but a lot of quacks still talk about it as if it worked. There is an extended, last-ditch effort by monetarists to hang-on to such antiquated and misleading ideas because they provide cover for anti-taxers. Talk of the Gold Standard is a distraction offered to “cure” unbalanced federal budgets, but underneath, it's simply a smokescreen used by Politics-for-the-Wealthy. Low taxation is what causes unbalanced federal budgets, not spending. Spending is what creates robust economies, especially economies that everyone can participate in. High taxes are a luxury that people who have lots of imaginary money can afford. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-03_246_gold_standard.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-03_246_gold_standard.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash economics, liberty, politics, humor no Mon, 19 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Practically no one truly understands economics, including so-called economists who think that balancing a budget is of paramount important. Well, it's not except in the realm of accounting, but economics is definitely not accounting even though a lot of people confuse the two. Economics is how a society increases its productivity to the point where people's basic needs are met with very little work, and they can choose to work more for status or fulfillment reasons, or not, which is certainly the very essence of liberty. Both political Parties, the Republican Party especially, use this confusion between accounting & economics to frighten people into voting in ways that enrich The Rich. They have plenty of cover from experts who call themselves monetarists, that think in terms of profit & loss above all else, with little understanding of what the goal of American society is, or how to get there. Monetarists are all about balancing the Federal budget through discretionary spending cuts rather than tax increases. Monetarism focuses on preventing inflation because it devalues the wealth The Rich already have. A devaluation of the dollar is a rough redistribution of wealth to all the people on government assistance, more than half the population, and inflation would make little difference to most citizens who have low-paying jobs & little opportunity, yet the discretionary spending monetarists want to cut is the money that goes to those same barely-making-it citizens. Perhaps Monetarists are Royalists, believing that an aristocracy is a preferable method of governance, but probably they are simply not critical enough of their own thinking, grasping to be among The 1% themselves.]]> Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-03_245_monetarism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-03_245_monetarism.mp3 2:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash economics, liberty, politics, humor no Sat, 17 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The biggest & most egregious example of Welfare-for-The-Rich is the intentionally obscure practice of Quantitative Easing by a semi-public organization known as The Federal Reserve... The Fed. The Fed's very existence is often questioned; its main purpose seems to be one of comfort & reassurance, the illusion that the U.S. economy can be fine-tuned by very elite people who know arcane magic. That's almost entirely bullshit, what The Fed does with interest rates in actuality has little to do with the interest rates you pay. The only substantive thing The Fed does is facilitate the transfer of wealth from the Middle Class to The Rich. Quantitative Easing is the practice of The Fed purchasing bad loans from banks with made-up money. Since money is imaginary anyway, just creating money out of nothing is not in itself a bad thing, since the vast majority of money in the economy is already make-believe. Also, taking bad loans from banks does have a positive effect on the financial system as a whole, and since we are all at the mercy of the banks, that's in general, a good thing if banks were benign, and not serving themselves first. However, consider who's being helped most by Quantitative Easing? Banks are not public enterprises; bailing them out doesn't just help the public, it also benefits the private owners, typically people thoroughly entrenched in The 1%. For every fraction The Middle Class is helped, those titans of wealth are helped tenfold, further increasing the wealth disparity in America. It's not that Quantitative Easing doesn't work for everyone, it just works better for the most wealthy among us, and in relative terms, their fortunes increase while everyone else's decline. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-01_244_quantitative_easing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-01_244_quantitative_easing.mp3 2:49 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash economics, liberty, politics, humor no Thu, 15 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The most abused word in economics is "inflation." Inflation is evoked as a counter to any new economic policy by those against it, so often that it has lost all credibility, and frankly, it should. Thinking about it even for a moment, inflation occurs when the demand for a product exceeds the supply, but in America, most staples in life have an almost magically endless supply due to our advanced level of productivity. If anybody wants a new pair of shoes, or clothes, or food, or any staples, they can pay the same amount for any amount. Only status symbols can become rare, that's why they're status symbols. Inflation really only applies to goods that people buy to accumulate wealth, so whenever you hear someone use "inflation" as a reason to be against something, suspect ulterior motives of their own personal wealth. Roughly, inflation redistributes wealth from those who loan it to those who borrow it, so the prime objective of those that have wealth is to prevent inflation. You can tell how powerful these people are by listening to the lock-step, single-minded attention to inflation the business channels present: creating jobs causes inflation; high employment causes inflation; stimulus spending causes inflation & a robust economy causes inflation. Are you seeing the connections here? These conditions would benefit most of society but indirectly threaten the wealth of The 1%, so they make them seem like a bad thing... Because inflation. In reality, inflation is a good thing for aspiring people: it causes banks to pay interest on savings, it devalues longterm debt & it subtly emphasizes productivity over consumption, rewarding earning money today rather than enshrining the past. How is it that being retired has become more profitable than working? I know it will be difficult to see past your indoctrinated hostility towards inflation but you've been played. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-01_243_why_inflation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-05-01_243_why_inflation.mp3 3:06 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash economics, liberty, politics, humor no Tue, 13 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There are a lot of highly-educated people who claim special insight, and the ability to use the past to predict the future: “economic cycles” is one of those old canards. Business textbooks written by theorists point at some correlation between imports-exports, worker availability, public opinion, or some other subset of the infinite factors that make up an economy, then create a narrative that fits their cherry-picked data. According to them, America is long overdue for an economic crash. Well, if they actually knew what they were talking about, the crash would have already occurred. All we can say for certain is that there will be a crash, not based on past crashes, no, the next crash will occur for its own unique reasons. Why can we be so certain there will be a crash? Because the real economic cycle is driven by how long it takes for canny individuals to rig part of a very complex system to their advantage, which then cascades to other parts, unbalancing the whole shebang, and eventually some seemingly random event will cause everything to collapse because that's what complex things eventually do. A collapse will happen; no one can predict when but we're all waiting for it. Luckily, our vibrant capitalistic businesses have a good chance of extending the cycle through ever increasing productivity by rapid adoption of new techniques, and Creative Destruction. But have no doubt, eventually we will become mired in the status quo, opportunity will be stifled, consumption will increase faster than productivity, or democracy will allow the envy & resentment of the unconsummated masses to prevail, then America will be no better off than any tin-pot socialist society in Europe. Either America collapses, regains its liberty, and raises again, or some other country will rise to the occasion, and Americans will watch from the bread lines. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-29_242_economic_cycles.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-29_242_economic_cycles.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash economics, liberty, politics, humor no Sun, 11 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review society's social contract: If you're down on your luck, and ask nicely, Americans will provide a social safety net. Perception is reality because people want it to be. Business serves society, not the other way around. Punishing an institution for the actions of an individual, punishes the innocent. If Work Ethic is important to society then society needs to provide Jobs for Everyone. Americans feel entitled to what they have rather than thankful. Dependence on government must stop being inter-generational. Being Poor requires a change in attitude more than anything else. Bureaucrats are created when accountability does not follow responsibility. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.     Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-29_241_social_contract_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-29_241_social_contract_concepts.mp3 2:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social contract, liberty, politics, humor no Fri, 09 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy After all the demigogery & sactimonious posturing, the Social Safety Net still needs to be administered. Unfortunately, Market Forces do not apply; the only place profit can come from is by siphoning it off from the people who we are supposedly helping, so social programs become one of those few areas that government itself must perform, which leads to bureacracy & bureaucrats. Buraucracy is what develops when those who are responsible are not held accountable. Government bureaucracy is the worst of all because of its socialist component where workers come first so are imprevious to management, and management is neither rewarded nor penalized for their effort, so is at best mediocre. Incompetent & unambitious people claw desparately to get jobs working for the government for just these reasons. There are also the political ramifications of social programs because the clientel for those services overwhelmingly see themselves as victims, so even if their Case Manager was young, optimistic & had the best of intentions when they begin their career, they look around at the bureacrats feathering their nests, the lack of any kind of reward for doing more than the absolute minium of their job, no respect from their clients or from the public, and sooner-or-later give into the malise, or leave the field altogether. This is almost an incurable dilema but there is an option: retired people. Retired people who have nothing to gain from empire building, feather-bedding, brown-nosing, or any of the detrimental motives that drive bureaucrats could be Case Managers, or ambitious but temporarily unemployed business managers, or incentive pay that ignores union rules, seniority, and all the other inhibitions on personal excellence. These things would work because bureaucrats aren't born that way, they're created. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-29_240_bureaucrats.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-29_240_bureaucrats.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social contract, liberty, politics, humor no Wed, 07 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The whole problem with poverty is its definition. What is poverty? Money won't cure poverty because money isn't the problem. Poorhood is much more a measure of ignorance, incompetence and a surrender to the baseness of human motives. Poorhood's first cousin, Victimhood, is the ultimate excuse for not relying on your own actions but expecting someone else to go first. Poorhoodedness also plays into the savior-complex of The Poor enablers, a vicious cycle of entitlement thinking & self-interested pandering. Helping the poor is a euphemism for guilting the emotionally vulnerable. It's the club used by the sanctimonious to terrorize compassionate people. Like any vested interests, the Poor People industry attempts to perpetuate itself, and the most effective means is to widen the definition of what “poor” is, but poor is not a measurable condition, it's an attitude. Not having money does not relate to not having ambition, but being poor does. There are no answers for The Poor except to not expect anything, and to stop the cycle of Poorness by indoctrinating their children about work ethic. This is America, we're more concerned that people who are trying for the Bass Ring get a taste. It's the Go-getters that we want to help into the Middle Class, and a lucky few will hit the jackpot. What we need for Go-getters are jobs, and that life's basics be inexpensive & convenient. Take care of the ambitious, and liberty will flourish, ignore them, and they will side with The Poor. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-27_239_the_poor.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-27_239_the_poor.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social contract, liberty, politics, humor no Mon, 05 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberty is most threatened by the people who don't want it. Many people simply don't like responsibility, and certainly would rather lounge around all day than work. Those two underlying motivations, under cover of socialist gibberish, are a huge part of the government dependence problem. Folks who have come to expect everyone else to take care of them, even though they are able-bodied, are raising children with the same expectations. States like Hawaii pay Middle Class level Welfare to native Hawaiians to maintain their unproductive culture. The inner-cities are full of multi-generational ghettos of government dependees. Rural America also has a significant share of whole communities of unemployed people all receiving disability benefits. It's not the current crop of sorry souls that is the most concerning, it's their descendants who assume the attitudes of their parents & peers: no ambition, less conscientious behavior, and the expectation that things are given to them. If someone is partaking of the Social Safety Net, they need to be given responsibilities & Work Ethic. Their children need to see it, need to grow up knowing that life requires effort, and that other members of society are expecting them to take care of themselves. There are plenty of “jobs” that need doing; most obviously, babysitting one another's children when mothers are at their jobs. Jobs include answering family hotlines, checking up on the elderly, picking up trash, Citizen's Watch, and an endless array of creative tasks that keep unskilled people busy while simultaneously improving the community they live in. Even attending parenting class, or some other self-improvement training, qualifies as work. The skilled but retired among them could provide oversight. They may be dependent on government but, hopefully, their children, raised in an environment of expectations & performance, will not be. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-27_238_government_dependence.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-27_238_government_dependence.mp3 2:51 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social contract, liberty, politics, humor no Sat, 03 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy America is changing: work-ethic is down, prestige-seeking is up & irrationality abounds. Repeating opinions you've already heard is not what we do here, so any discussion of the sense of entitlement exhibited by the children of GenX is Old News, but that doesn't make it any less real. And there's no need to mention the featherbedding by Baby-Boomer retirees at the expense of young families. No, why should we rehash what all the pundits are saying about our national identity being subverted by greed, short-sightedness & self-interest. It's been said enough already, right? We're too good to live like our grandparents. Already, we don’t pick our own strawberries or sew our own clothes. Blue-collar jobs have become low status, actually looked down upon as beneath our dignity. The illusion that everyone's opinion means something is reinforced by the exploitation of democracy. No one changes their mind, and no need to associate with anybody who doesn't agree with you, and there is no compromising. Americans think they are entitled to what they have rather than thankful for it, and refuse to believe otherwise, which also explains why there's a sense of impending doom. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-25_237_sense_of_entitlement.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-25_237_sense_of_entitlement.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social contract, liberty, politics, humor no Thu, 01 Jun 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Productivity allows us to work less and get more for our labor. The Industrial Revolution was just the start; productivity has been on an upward slope ever since, and eventually increasing productivity, usually through automation, will lead us to Star Trek Replicator levels of goods & services. However, whether it's automation or shifting jobs overseas, it won't be an easy ride for the Middle Class who need the missing jobs. Several solutions have been presented to alleviate this problem, the most insidious being just giving everyone money to do nothing. That sounds ridiculous on its face, and it is, but to people who have no job, or hate their job, it sounds wonderful so they don't examine the illogic too closely, namely, where does the money come from if no one's working? Granted, we could simply print money, but other nations have tried that with disastrous results, or we could engage in the magical thinking that enough people will want to work so that the rest of us can drink margaritas down at the beach and create art. Which brings us to an even more important reason for jobs: to indoctrinate citizens with a work ethic because people can only be unproductively lying on the beach by impinging on the liberty of others. Teaching & maintaining work ethic is essential to a functional society, but if society expects it citizens to work then it better provide jobs. In fact, guaranteed, State-sponsored jobs would cure a lot of ills, but people need something worthwhile to do. Make-Work projects may be okay for initial training & as a penalty, but no one wants their effort to simply be Sisyphus pushing the boulder up the mountain. Luckily, infrastructure jobs both imbue Work Ethic and are an investment in society. There are millions of unemployed people who could fill all aspects of infrastructure: planning, management, journeyman, and of course, menial labor for even the most unskilled of us. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-25_236_jobs_for_everyone.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-25_236_jobs_for_everyone.mp3 3:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social contract, liberty, politics, humor no Tue, 30 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy People are responsible, not institutions. People should suffer the legal consequences of their actions at an institution, not the entire institution. The parishioners of a church aren't responsible for the sins of the priest; the stockholders of a company are not responsible for the missteps of its employees; taxpayers are not responsible for the brutality of police officers; nor are Property owners responsible for predatory teachers in schools. The shielding of responsibility of individuals by hiding within institutions puts the onus on innocent Third Parties like stockholders, parishioners, taxpayers & home-owners. This diversion of responsibility needs to stop because when institutions are held accountable for the actions of individuals, the liberty of the many is sacrificed for the advantage of the few. Similarly, people should participate in the political process, not institutions. It's because we have imbued institutions with the Free Speech Rights of people that government now serves the better financed & organized institutions rather than The People. People can be excused for part of their confusion about who is responsible for what because most of it is directly attributable to the perversely incentivized liability industry, reinforced & encouraged by the usurious insurance industry, both trying to ferret out the deepest pockets rather than deliver justice. It's a vicious cycle: insurance & liability institutions distort the political process to make individuals responsible for the actions of institutions. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-23_235_people_vs_institutions.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-23_235_people_vs_institutions.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social contract, liberty, politics, humor no Sun, 28 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Society is comprised of people. Part of The Deal that people in a Liberty society make is to protect one another, to care for the vulnerable, and to respect others. Obviously, these expectations can only be made between people, not objects or imaginary constructs like businesses, which is why business is secondary to the needs of people. Business serves society, not the other way around. Unfortunately, the Aristocracy have used their undue power & influence to leverage government leaders & courts into giving businesses some of the Rights of people for reasons that only serve Special Interests. Business Rights blur the line between business & people, an important distinction when priorities are enforced. This confusion must be resolved or it will destroy society because businesses are NOT people, should not be treated like people, and certainly should not have Rights like people. Society can still legally protect business without diluting the Constitutional protections of people. Giving businesses Rights is a blatant attempt by the Aristocracy to avoid the obligations that business has to society. If a nation wants to discourage cigarette smoking by barring advertising of the product, they can; if society says a commercial enterprise must not discriminate, it can't; and if The People want to protect jobs from depredation by foreign nations, they will. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-23_234_people_before_business.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-23_234_people_before_business.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social contract, liberty, politics, humor no Fri, 26 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy A well known political axiom is that “perception is reality.” If the mob perceives a witch, there is a witch, regardless of common sense, logic, or reality. But how can that be in a sophisticated world? How can advertisement-savvy consumers be so easily fooled in the political arena? They aren’t… Perception is reality in politics because people tacitly want it to be. A philanderer is only a bad thing if people don't like the unfaithful person; sexism is only career-ending if it serves some ulterior motive; dishonestly will only be a millstone around the necks of people who can't deliver on their promises. Perception is not some psychological mystery no one understands, it's the exact opposite, we understand it too well, and exploitation of perception is the stock-in-trade of pontificators everywhere. For example, it's uncouth to openly admit one’s greed, resentment, petty banalities & self-interests, but if those base instincts can be hidden behind a facade of respectability then their manifestation can be fully realized. If a clever political orator provides intellectual or moral cover for people to hide their unsavory proclivities, then that leader can command a mob to unspeakable social horrors, and no one has to admit their complicity. These leaders don't get followers because they fooled them, anything but, the followers were simply waiting for a leader that empowered them by giving they perceptual camouflage. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-21_233_perception.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-21_233_perception.mp3 2:30 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social contract, liberty, politics, humor no Wed, 24 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There's an important difference between how Americans perceive the Social Safetynet & what socialists want. To Americans, if you're down on your luck, and you ask nicely, we'll provide charity as part of The Deal, but it's up to us, and we're going to put some expectations on you. Socialists, on-the-other-hand, want help to be a Right, and worse, it's your duty to provide whatever people need to survive, as defined by other people. This entirely reverses the obligation, taking liberty from the Giver & giving it to the Asker. No other liberty battleground is so important as the ideology justifying the Social Safetynet. Modern life is just too complicated for most people, and getting more so. A weakness of liberty is that it benefits the capable & competitent, but tends to let those less so slide into confusion & failure. Many people, perhaps most, are at least partially, if not completely incompetent. In times past, many employers were much more patriarchal, and assumed some of the responsibility for their employees' own lives but at the expense of their liberty. In fact, The State is often more capable of running many people's lives than they are. This flies in the face of conventional wisdom that given a chance, people can take care of themselves... No, most people need a little help. In some cases, they need help in everything. How that help is provided, and what is expected in return, is what the Social Safetynet is. That's why liberty-seekers need to agree on what they're going to do, or the socialists will win & you'll be responsible for a lot more than you bargained for in The Deal. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-21_232_the_social_safetnet.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-21_232_the_social_safetnet.mp3 2:47 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social contract, liberty, politics, humor no Mon, 22 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the issues of America's arising aristocracy: People will honor The Deal as long as it's the best option for them. Folks who flip heads 10 times in a row think they deserved it. Superficial success is what knowing the right people gets you. Americans supposedly reject an aristocracy but one is emerging anyway. The aristocracy expect average Americans to protect their privileged position. Rich people do not have unique abilities that make them special. Wealth concentration decreases liberty. Wealth needs to be spread from the 1% into the hands of the Top Quarter. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-19_231_aristocratic_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-19_231_aristocratic_concepts.mp3 1:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, liberty, politics, humor no Sat, 20 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The goal of wealth redistribution has nothing to do with fairness or inequality, those are socialist concepts; it's simply that wealth concentration limits liberty if the goal is the-most-liberty-to-the-most-people. Capitalism is a good mechanism for spreading wealth but it also concentrates wealth in a tiny handful of people. Other than catastrophe, the only way to redistribute concentrated wealth is through taxation, but taxes too can be exploited. In fact, regressive taxation, like Sales Tax, Property Tax, Social Security & any other tax that subsidizes The Rich by taking from everybody else, actually concentrate wealth more. Only progressive Income Taxes & Inheritance Taxes work to spread the wealth. Of the 330 million people in the U.S., 2% are considered "Gifted," meaning they can basically do anything. That's 7 million people, and another 5-10% of the population are extremely competent. In fact, the Top Quarter of the population pull everyone else along. Almost all jobs could use any Gifted person, and most of the Extremely Competent people are interchangeable too. And once a process is in operation, any Competent person can take over. However, as it stands, a quarter of the GNP goes to only the Top 1%, and the Top .01% get the lion's share of that, while the Middle Class is precariously shrinking. Society would be much healthier if income was pushed downward from the super-elite. This is not the same as redistributing wealth to the poor, instead it's letting the next equally talented & ambitious person catch some opportunity. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-19_230_spread_the_wealth.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-19_230_spread_the_wealth.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, liberty, politics, humor no Thu, 18 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy America chose liberty so that people could make decisions for themselves & control their own lives, and Capitalism was their economic system of choice because it closely matches the liberty ideal. But Capitalism can be detrimental to liberty because it creates an unequal distribution of wealth, and concentrations of wealth concentrate opportunity too, and vast accumulations of wealth accumulate power, which has a negative impact on liberty. Plus, wild wealth disparity creates a de facto Class system that tends to monopolize liberty and breed disdain among the aristocracy for the little people. Respect for allies is at the very core of our liberty principles which is why most Americans feel betrayed by a Class system. Americans will accept wealth inequality up to a point, as long as it doesn't affect their liberty in a discernible way, and as long as everyone has at least a nominal opportunity of obtaining wealth themselves through skill, hard work, tenacity & luck, but if opportunity is only the purview of the wealthy, that Americans will not accept. Our nation cannot ignore the negative impact that increasing wealth disparity has on liberty because it leads to an increasing adversarial relationship between those with great wealth & those being left behind. Inevitably, as the gap widens, something will have to give, and hopefully it's not liberty that cracks first. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-19_229_wealth_vs_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-19_229_wealth_vs_liberty.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, liberty, politics, humor no Tue, 16 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Humans hold a reverence for money, however it was obtained, inherited money being the most common. Lots of money provides a sense of inevitability, the assumption that whatever The Rich do must be correct, and gives them an air of invincibility. This makes commoners reluctant to question them out of lack of conviction in their own thoughts because they are not rich, and fear that The Rich will punish them for their impudence. It must be a manifestation of evolution: the human willingness to be subjugated by physical strength has morphed into a willingness to be subjugated by those with money; to curry their favor, to stand in the shadow of their social dominance because, in the end, status is the ultimate achievement. A lot of folks think rich people somehow deserved their money: they were the best at what they did, or worked harder than everyone else, or some other justification that made them more special than all the losers who didn't succeed. Then there's the canard that wealth trickles down from The Rich investing their money: they are even considered catalysts of the economy. The Rich exploit this myth to claim their money is special too, and in fact, The Rich are taxed at a lot lower rate than a guy who works in construction and has to make the mortgage every month. Of course, it's The Rich's special access to power that promulgates this hogwash, and the public's desire to believe in their specialness. Certainly people who inherited their wealth are no more special than you, and virtually any CEO can be replaced by someone else from the top quarter of the population. Conversely, there're lots of people who are the best at what they do but they didn't get rich. The only thing special about rich people is their inordinate luck. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-17_228_rich_people_are_not_special.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-17_228_rich_people_are_not_special.mp3 2:41 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, liberty, politics, humor no Sun, 14 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Citizens of a nation really only have three things to give, the same three things that, not coincidentally, they expect to get: help, laws, and defense. Defense is the one thing that everyone absolutely, positively has to have because humans are predators & we don't live in peace naturally. Rich people have the most to lose, of course, and there aren't very many of them so they depend on everyone else to protect them, but that should be our choice, not theirs. The Rich don't like it that way, being beholden to the rest of us, so they use their undue influence to dominate a political Party, the Republicans, to do their bidding by manipulating the concepts of courage, patriotism, and duty, to cajole everyone into protecting their privileged position, but without a comparable relative sacrifice. The general public really should be demanding more from The Rich. If your children's children are destined to only serve at the behest of the 0.01% then that is not democracy & freedom, that is tyranny. Why should your lineage defend & support their aristocracy? That's why when Conservatives demand that everyone risk their lives to protect the vast wealth of the tiny few, they are taking away one of the only things the rest of us have to barter with. Similarly, when The Many pool their resources to produce infrastructure, an economy & a society, the Aristocracy get all those benefits that they never could have completed themselves yet contribute only a relative pittance. We Americans were raised to reject an inherited aristocracy because, naturally, The Many become the servants of the few, which is the antithesis of liberty. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-17_227_protecting_the_aristocracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-17_227_protecting_the_aristocracy.mp3 2:42 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, liberty, politics, humor no Fri, 12 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The aristocracy in America has changed: a century ago, the concept of Social Darwinism was fashionable, the idea that wealthy people became that way through some kind of natural selection, even mystical intervention. Aristocrats thought Divine Providence justified their feelings of superiority & self-righteousness, and simply took it for granted that they were meant to occupy the top notch of the social hierarchy, and the prosperity of the whole nation flowed down from them. However, their ambition & reach was limited by the practicalities of the time: slow communication, poor data collection, and the religious indoctrination of charity & duty to their fellow man. Powerful individuals with marque names like Carnegie, Mellon, Getty & Rockefeller, showed some semblance of a conscience due to guilt, self-interest, or desire for accolades from the masses. But now, the power of elite individuals have been replaced by unaccountable Stateless corporations whose only goal is profit, and technology has magnified their omniscient power. The rise of the corporations has facilitated the rise of the aristocracy, especially as the U.S. Supreme Court has granted corporations Rights that used to only be the purview of individuals: Free Speech & Freedom of Religion. This subversion of what-vs-who aids the aristocracy because it hides them from social censure. People do not feel an alliance with corporations so it is difficult to feel betrayed by them or envious of them, and because the vast majority of corporations are in fact beneficial, the aristocratic sock-puppeteers can hide in their aura. This is how the aristocracy manipulates the levers of power and escape the justifiable outrage of the public. Eliminate the aristocratic Class & corporations go back to being benign business vehicles of good. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-15_226_aristocracy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-15_226_aristocracy.mp3 2:52 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, liberty, politics, humor no Wed, 10 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy From the outside, many people exhibit the visible indicators of success: prestigious jobs, peer acclaim, and the accumulation of trendy goods. However, how much of those people's trajectory in life has been through behind-the-scenes circumstances & machinations in which merit played little part? Why should graduating from an Ivy League University be such an all important ingredient of their life? Why should being Jewish or Mormon be more of an advantage than a high IQ? Why should athletic ability confer more status than an advanced degree? Clan associations & fraternal relations completely overwhelm personal effort, though the recipients of such largess are often ignorant that they are receiving special treatment.Society's lauding of honors & awards reinforces this false narrative because the organizations that are co-opted are the ones giving out the awards. In fact, the only explanation for the superficial success of The 1% is a Virtual Class System which is mostly determined by the happenstance of birth. The occasional overachiever can still break through, and are often used as proof that boot-strapping is still possible, but those singular individuals are few indeed, and the chance of most people exceeding the boundaries they were born into has become fleeting small. The American Dream has succumbed to aristocracy. The reason it existed at all was because our ancestors started out mostly classless, and the only way we will get it back is to eliminate the inherited aristocratic class. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-15_225_superficial_success.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-15_225_superficial_success.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, liberty, politics, humor no Mon, 08 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy If you were flipping a coin, and you had never done it before, and you got 10 heads in a row, wouldn't you think it was easy? That's what most successful people believe: they attribute their winnings to hard work & skill, where in reality they were simply at the extreme margins of probability. Unfortunately, since nothing but chance separates the winners from the rest of us, and luck can't be quantified, we simply ignore that most essential of all components. But the problem is, we've built a society around the mythology of merit, when in reality the top quarter of the population could randomly replace anyone else. There is no reason for the astounding income inequality among that group but only the top 1% receive the vast majority of the spoils, and are sure they deserve it due to their singular polished performance. I can say one thing for certain, all the second place finishers certainly don't equate their loss to stupidity, laziness or being awkward. Then there's the insidious natural tendency for people to think they are special due to their birthright, that simply being in the family tree of some exceptionally lucky progenitor, they too are exceptional & revel in their superiority. This is the foundation of aristocracy, and it is corrosive to a liberty society because superiority & respect do not mix well; servants, no matter how competent, are in a lower class, and will forever be treated that way, consciously & unconsciously, it's human nature. Rather than discuss a particular solution to this inevitable problem, it's best to recognize it exists & should be accounted for. If an elite class is allowed to think they deserve to exist, their asymmetric power will guide the reins of government to always prefer them. Liberal democracies can only exist if people agree to follow the rules, whether it be a pedestrian class violating The Law, or the patrician class violating the essence of The Deal. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-10_224_heads_10_times_in_a_row.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-10_224_heads_10_times_in_a_row.mp3 3:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, liberty, politics, humor no Sat, 06 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy What gives you or anyone the right to have anything? Force. That's all, force. If you have something I want, I'll take it unless you can stop me with more force. But we can make a deal: you work with me & I'll work with you to our mutual benefit. In the liberty sense, I'll leave you alone, watch your back in a fight against a common enemy, take care of you if you're ill & in your old age, and you do the same for me. We also tacitly agree to follow a common set of rules. We are allies. Not said, but definitely implied, is my need for dignity & respect, and because envy & resentment play a huge role in any human interaction, I must feel I have the same opportunity for success as you do. The Deal will continue until one side or the other thinks they can do better without it. For example, the power of one side may become so lopsided that it simply becomes a dictator, or the other side recognizes it can gain more through violence, or use the cudgel of democracy to take what they want. That's why both sides need to first be taking care of their own needs, but always glancing into the camp of the other for signs of dissatisfaction or complacency. I can only be free to do as I want if other people feel the same way. The Deal is the philosophy formulated during The Enlightenment, and the foundation of liberty. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-10_223_the_deal.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-10_223_the_deal.mp3 2:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash aristocracy, liberty, politics, humor no Thu, 04 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the issues of socialism: Collectivism is opposite of individualism. Socialism is “the most good to the most people” as decided by someone else. Socialist values are egalitarian, and they think everyone should be. Socialism is telling rather than asking. Socialism inevitably leads to tyranny. Socialists feel compelled to proselytize their ideology. Socialists are infiltrating local politics & Social Media. The Democratic Party is being increasing dominated by socialist thinking. There's no place for Liberals to go. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-09_222_socialism_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-09_222_socialism_concepts.mp3 1:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, collectivism, politics, humor no Tue, 02 May 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberals are Democrats who still put liberty first. Back when socialists had no foothold in America, certainly not in the Democratic Party of JFK or Lyndon Johnson, it could be assumed that Democrats were Liberals. The ideals of Liberals were formed by moon landings, political protests, and most of all, The Cold War. Back then, the Democratic Party used to talk about upward mobility in the Classical Liberal sense. A Classical Liberal supports progressive taxation, full employment, conservation, universal healthcare, and government regulation of business. Liberalism is still the choice for upper mobility & the Middle Class, because it tries to tear down the entrenched aristocracy to increase liberty for more people. Being liberal was why one was a Democrat. Republicans tried to demonize the word “liberal,” but they only succeeded in driving a wedge between erstwhile allies because whereas Liberals still put liberty first, the current majority of the Democratic Party, the Progressives, are eschewing liberty for paternalism, the true threat to American ideals. Unfortunately, Liberal is often confused with Progressive. The debate in this country would become much clearer if the Progressives would simply adopt the Socialism label rather than having to give an explanation of why they aren't socialists. Liberals are an ever-narrowing slice of the Democratic Party, and since we are a 2-Party system with no foreseeable way to change it, they have no place to go... Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-09_221_liberals.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-09_221_liberals.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, collectivism, politics, humor no Sun, 30 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Because of the Cold War, liberty was in ascendance the second half of the last century, no question. The Democratic Party, the Party of Truman, Kennedy & Johnson, had no sympathy for socialist ideals of public ownership & totalitarian rule; even President Johnson's “War on Poverty” was couched in liberty terms, and Welfare today is still charity, not a Right, like socialists want. But as the Red scare dissipated, socialists crept out of the shadows to promulgate their alluring ideology, and since there are only two Parties in America, socialists set their sights on the Democratic Party. It's a good match, Labor has always had heavy socialist tendencies, and because these people don't explicitly espouse nationalization of private industry, or the muting of religion, or some other aspect of Marxism-based socialism, they aren't technically socialists, so they call themselves Progressives, but still walk-like-a-duck... When these modern Democrats talk about values, they're talking about socialist values: equality, oppression, racism, globalism, environmentalism, feminism, labor, and insist that these values are the values of all Democrats. They literally tell Old White Guy Kennedy-style Democrats to shut-up. They encourage “Safe Spaces” free of the aura of liberty, and even claim that Free Speech hinders development of young minds, to more easily co-opt the young & impressionable. They subvert The Law's mechanism for protecting the minority into minority dictating to the majority, up to & including the lack of bathroom privacy. This overreach inevitably led to a backlash, resulting in a Trump presidency, but rather than dial back the socialist rhetoric, socialists in the Democratic Party seem intent on doubling-down. The reason is obviously RealPolitik: feminists, Gays, Blacks & other splinter groups that benefit from socialism, have ascended the Democratic Party hierarchy, and don't want to cede their newly-achieved power. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-08_220_socialism__democrats.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-08_220_socialism__democrats.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, collectivism, politics, humor no Fri, 28 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Socialists don't call themselves socialists, and they certainly don't call themselves Communists, that terminology became anathema after the terror of their Soviet darlings became public in the 1950s, and being unfashionable is considered heinous by socialists. Instead, they hide behind the term, Progressives. That's unfair to Theodore Roosevelt's Progressive label, but socialists have always been master manipulators of language: “NewSpeak,” the Orwellian term for socialist obfuscation using linguistics, is their specialty. Socialists have developed a number of tactics to advance their ideology, including: claiming victimhood, sanctimonious posturing, and most effective, preying on the naivete & angst of the young. More crassly, they also demonize business, ridicule men, exploit courtesy, guilt Whites and chant slogans at demonstrations. Their political strategy is to infiltrate elective office in local governments. For example, they have been particularly effective in the Pacific Northwest: the Portland & Seattle City Councils are dominated by Progressives, and large, well-financed umbrella organizations like MoveOn.org promote the socialist agenda & finance socialist candidates. The socialist Echo Chamber seems to be most virulent on Social Media, where those that do not pledge allegiance to the immediate cause celebre are ostracized through the simple act of deFriending. Their constant & coordinated hand-wringing & virtue-signaling extend into powerful mainstream media companies, like The New York Times, Washington Post, Google, Comcast & Time Warner. Hollywood has always been rife with socialist pretenders, probably because people who get so many accolades from contributing so little feel guilty, so must claim the moral high ground, but also because the glitterati have the visceral need to always be the center of attention, and pretending to care for the Little Guy when you, yourself, are part of the enviable 1%, has always been the height of socialist hypocrisy. Socialists tend to be well-organized & present their message quite effectively; if their irrationality was not so self-defeating, it could easily dominate society in America as it has in the rest of the World. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-08_219_socialist_tactics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-08_219_socialist_tactics.mp3 3:14 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, collectivism, politics, humor no Wed, 26 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Unlike modern liberty's relatively recent emergence during The Enlightenment, socialism has probably been around since the beginning of humanity: ancient tribes were share-n-share alike, and many backward nations still can't move out of the Stone Age because of lack of the concept of private property. Most religious teachings are full of socialist dogma because if you're a peasant, there's just no other way to survive when the Czar takes all your food. Every time missionaries knock on your door, they're basically pedaling old socialist doctrine from two millennium ago, and every parent tells their child to share, and every pre-schooler only gets an apple if everyone else has one. Crusades still exist: socialists feel everyone should be socialist, usually for “fairness,” and that they have a duty to spread it. Their self-righteous eagerness to force others into their worldview is on daily exhibition via virtue-signaling: the environment, veganism, Welfare, diversity, oppression, equality, feminism, etc. They often take great satisfaction in imposing their will, of seeing the lofty aspirations of others dashed into mediocrity, and even express a kind of sanctimonious glee at the prospect: Germans call it schadenfreude; Australians use the phrase, “hewing down the tall poppies.” It's why socialists make such great revolutionaries. Unless the masses are educated in the ways of liberty, socialism appears to be a better option. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-07_218_proselytizing_socialism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-07_218_proselytizing_socialism.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, collectivism, politics, humor no Mon, 24 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Since collectivism is the concept that the needs of the group outweigh the wants of an individual, it implies Elites who can determine what is best for everyone, and make decisions for everyone. Because collectivists come from nations with a historical aristocracy, they are comfortable with the concept of hereditary masters telling them what to do, so there was only a tiny jump from hereditary elites to elected ones. Americans, because of our focus on personal liberty, were never conditioned to acknowledge that some people are special, and could be trusted to do what was best for you. In fact, many of America's immigrant founders were trying to escape that very tyranny. Our entire government is set up to diffuse power to make it very difficult to dictate commands, and prevent a small, elite class from forming. Quoting my favorite anti-collectivist, George Orwell, “It cannot be said too often that collectivism is not inherently democratic, but, on the contrary, gives to a tyrannical minority such powers as the Spanish Inquisitors never dreamt of.” The idea that someone can be entrusted to know what is best for everyone, and have everyone's best interests at heart, is mystical in a couple of ways: first, no one can predict the future, the complexities of the present are unknowable; and second, the base passions of man, however in abeyance they may be today, cannot be reliably bound tomorrow, men naturally become monsters if not collared. And though socialism is couched in the words of reason & empathy, socialism's primary motivation is envy, resentment & covetousness. No human on either side of the equation can be expected to overcome their nature, and pretending otherwise is self-deception. Socialism is simply a subterfuge for tyranny. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-07_217_socialist_tyranny.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-07_217_socialist_tyranny.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, collectivism, politics, humor no Sat, 22 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There's a simple choice that best summarizes the difference between socialism and liberty: ask vs. tell. With liberty, individuals expect to be convinced to do something rather than being simply told to do so, while socialists blindly accept whatever obligations are thrust upon them. The difference is a subtle one because it determines who defines the priorities: you define what is important if someone must ask your permission, but someone else’s priorities prevail if they can make you adhere to their wishes. This distinction also shows up in American jurisprudence: the person with the Burden-of-Proof has the onus to make and support their argument. With liberty, individuals expect the person asking to shoulder the burden of proof, while socialists assume that whatever is determined to be for the public good is reason enough. Given the Ask-vs-Tell distinction, the concept that liberty leads to individual Rights seems clear enough, but socialists often argue that they also have individual Rights because individuals have a Right to democratically vote to decide what everyone should do. This only makes sense when compared to the European legacy of aristocracies casting down commandments from on-high, then democracy is an obvious improvement, but also the greatest threat to individual Rights because they could be voted away. Since Americans make democracy ancillary to liberty; people can't democratically override The Constitution's individual liberty guarantees, therefore Americans can always expect to be convinced why they should sacrifice some of their individual liberty for the greater social good. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-06_216_socialism_vs_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-06_216_socialism_vs_liberty.mp3 2:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, collectivism, politics, humor no Thu, 20 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Feminism and Women's Liberation. Who woulda thunk feminists were socialists? International Solidarity & Peace. So that would be Globalism. Cultural Freedom. The best Google hit I could get on this had something to do with “fulfillments of the psychic need of man.” Perhaps something to do with more federal holidays? Full Employment is something all political Parties should adopt. Ecological Harmony. Any goal including the word “harmony,” I'm guessing is a subjective call. Worker & Community Control sounds like the traditional socialist tendency against private property. The values of the U.S. Socialist Party seem very similar to Soviet Era Red Scare stuff, with all the implications thereof.]]> Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-06_215_socialist_values.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-06_215_socialist_values.mp3 2:50 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, collectivism, politics, humor no Tue, 18 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Philosopher Emanuel Kant equated socialism as “the most good to the most people,” and it's practiced in government as group-needs-override-individual-wants. Technically, socialism involves social ownership & democratic control of “the means of production,” which in political practice results is State ownership of natural resources, labor union ownership of business, and redistribution of wealth. The Nordic countries, often held up as the West's socialist ideal, use a combination of private & State ownership, centralized planning & economic interventionism, but there are many brands of socialism, for example, there's also Christain & Islamic religious socialism. Bizarrely, there's even the oxymoronishly named, Libertarian socialism, described using inpenetrable jagon involving “automony” & “coordinated” in the same sentence, but the socialist keyword “solidarity” does make an appearance. All of these socialisms just illustrate the confusion that surrounds the concept, and why no one group has a monopoly on the word or definition.]]> Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-05_214_what_is_socialism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-05_214_what_is_socialism.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, collectivism, politics, humor no Sun, 16 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy From Wikipedia: “Collectivism is the moral stance, political philosophy, ideology, or social outlook that emphasizes the group and its interests. Collectivism is the opposite of individualism.” Merriam-Webster dictionary is even more succint: “emphasis on collective rather than individual action or identity.” Collectivism is the fundamental basis of socialism & Marxism, and often it's difficult to tell which ideology people are talking about because all three words are used interchangably. A lot of people are not quite sure what collectivism is; they think they understand socialism; and Marxism/Communism is something scary, somehow involving nuclear missles. If you Google the word “socialism” and “Marxism,” they are often synomous, yet many European political Parties have “socialist” in their name, and they aren't Marxist, not even socialist by most definitions. It makes it very difficult to have a political debate about whether an ideology is collectivist or not, which is why we rely on the simple idiom behind all collectivism: group over individual. For example, if you use any of the collectivist words to describe a country, policy or person, you will invariable encounter someone who will try to blunt your argument by stating categorically that since the thing you mentioned does not include owership by the State, or it practices Free Market economics, or has an unequal distribution of wealth, it can't be socialist or even collectivist. These Word Police will not argue beyond the technicalities, and neither should you because any further debate will be fruitless. Whatever the backlash from the deniers, the word “socialism” is commonly used to identify all Group-Over-Individual ideologies. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-05_213_what_is_collectivism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-04-05_213_what_is_collectivism.mp3 2:50 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash socialism, collectivism, politics, humor no Fri, 14 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Let's review the top issues having to do with liberty: Liberty's legal definition can be found in Black's Law Dictionary. America is the only Liberty nation now but it may slip into socialism if not nurtured. Liberty is selfishness tempered by courtesy, dignity & respect. Liberty is not the same as freedom, though more freedom brings more liberty. Social Justice Warriors are cultural Marxists, intent on distorting the meaning of justice. The Marxist definition of “Equality” is the very antithesis of liberty. Accumulating money is accumulating liberty: redistributing one redistributes the other. Liberty requires a centralized society. Capitalism is almost a perfect match for liberty but also its potential downfall. The socialist World expects America to submit to their values. If we are to keep our liberty, we must defend it. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-26_212_liberty_concepts.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-26_212_liberty_concepts.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Wed, 12 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The concept of liberty seems clear & uncomplicated to those raised with it, however, collectivists around the world, those that insist that someone else knows what is best for everybody, and that what Americans call liberty is selfishness, have little or no concept of liberty. They insist the word "liberty" is simply a synonym for freedom with none of the ideal of individual sovereignty we aspire to in America. In fact, other nations insist that they're the ones with liberty, as defined & determined by them. Bizarrely, they even have rankings where America is lacking in “liberty.” This distortion of the concept of liberty is intentional, meant to confuse the debate so that the supporters of liberty do not recognize the battle between collectivism vs. liberty is even going on, but it's happening now, inside the U.S. The collectivists are globalists, believing that we should all be under the rule of a single World government, to do what is best for everyone, as they define it. They understand that the two ideologies, liberty vs. socialism, are incompatible, and that liberty advocates are simply too stupid & greedy to understand what is best for them, therefore they want the definition of “liberty” to be something that is compatible with socialism. If we want to keep our liberty, we cannot assume it will survive without proactive measures. Liberty-lovers must understand the conflict: first, we must maintain the American definition of “liberty.” Every time liberty is equated to freedom, deny that definition and repeat our own, that liberty is individual sovereignty. Also, counter the socialist credo of “the most good to the most people” with our own, “the most liberty to the most people;” and strategically, when collectivists try to use the language of shame & guilt to denigrate liberty, you must not go on the defensive but instead reject their characterization as their own selfish interests. The first step in any battle is identifying the enemy, and the enemy of liberty is socialism. ]]> Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-25_211_defending_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-25_211_defending_liberty.mp3 3:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Mon, 10 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The crux of America's differences with the rest of the World is embedded in the U.S. Constitution with the word “liberty” and what it means. All of our lives we are taught to idolize liberty, we even pledge to it. With liberty, you come first, and if someone wants to make you do or think something else then they better have a damn good reason, and be able to prove it in court. No other country regards liberty as their primary goal, in fact, the American definition of personal liberty is quite suspect to them, it seems like a free-for-all. They expect bureaucratic Elites to tell them what to do. Most Western countries focus on “most good to the most people,” a socialist concept, and the more Marxist-leaning make equality their goal. Liberty people think, “that's fine, it’s their country, they can do anything they want,” but that's the Live-And-Let-Live aspect of liberty speaking. Unfortunately, socialists don't think like that. They want “most good” to include you. They neither understand nor respect our liberty, and assume we accept their values. They expect us to homogenize into their world view because it will be better for everyone, and when we don't, they assume we are misguided, greedy & stupid. It's very difficult to respect people who don't respect you. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-24_210_liberty_vs_the_world.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-24_210_liberty_vs_the_world.mp3 2:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Sat, 08 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Both the greatness and the problems with America are related to liberty, the idea that people control their own lives, and benefit from their own choices & actions. Capitalism is an almost perfect match for liberty-seekers, but it's still an imaginary construct with artificial rules that can be exploited. Specifically, Capitalism is subject to three main weaknesses: monopoly, barrier to entry & accelerating accumulation of wealth, all eventual certainties to crash the system unless there is intervention, which is government's responsibility. In the case of monopolies, we have anti-monopoly laws, but they are currently being underenforced: just look at your limited selection of broadband providers. In the case of barriers to entry, government regulatory agencies have been captured; the pharmaceutical industry is an example. And in the case of accelerated accumulation of wealth, well, that's obvious. This isn't a new phenomenon, aristocracies have exploited the weaknesses of Capitalism throughout history, but you can't fool all of The People all of the time, and eventually The People will overreact with a draconian solution like socialism. During the last rise of the aristocracy in early 20th Century America, we had a strong socialist upswell & we're having it again. With the stagnation of opportunity, and the weaknesses of Capitalism mostly to blame, there's a whole generation that's giving up on liberty. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-24_209_liberty_vs_capitalism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-24_209_liberty_vs_capitalism.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Thu, 06 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy American-defined liberty, personal liberty, has only been a concept since The Enlightenment. Before that people were obligated to their church & to their king. Liberty was the revolutionally idea that people are their own sovereign, obligated to no one except by agreement; as allies rather than subjects, parishioners or kin. Since liberty was a new ideology when the nation was founded, all of its ramifications were not yet clear. Clan duties & religious dogma dissolved. All of those once community-based services, the essence of society, like charity, education & militias, were subsumed by centralized government. It turns out that maximum individualism, meaning you are beholden to no one, can only exist under the auspices of a strong State that can shield you from the control of parochial forces. However, there is a difference between extreme individualism and liberty. Liberty requires you to be aware of your allies so that your actions do not impose upon their liberty, and that you treat others as you would want them to treat you, with courtesy, dignity & respect. This is the difference that still allows libertyists to form societies, because we need allies and they need us, which is the foundation of our nation, and the new centralized society we live in that allows libety to flourish. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-22_208_liberty_vs_society.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-22_208_liberty_vs_society.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Tue, 04 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberty allows people to benefit from what they're good at, leading to the predictable outcome of people who are excellent at making money are going to end up with most of it. Compared to all other forms of success, money-making is most valued, and since there is a direct correlation between wealth & opportunity, people who make lots of money end up with most of the opportunity. Liberty tracks opportunity: the more opportunity, the more liberty, therefore a concentration of wealth in very few hands is adversarial with the ideal of the most liberty to the most people. Like all adversarial relationships, there is a balance: a Liberty Nation has to put artificial limits on the wealth-experts in able to provide all liberty-seeking people more of a share of opportunity. Two solutions seem obvious: high progressive taxation & confiscatory inheritance taxes, but the modern aristocracy has been particularly successful in stymieing these threats to their prospective dynasties. They have succeeded in indoctrinating a whole Party, the Republicans, with an inaccurate, knee-jerk perception of "taxes," that has infused all of society. Instead of teaching the danger of wealth concentration to liberty & how to address it, we as a nation actually idolize vast accumulations of wealth. It really is an Either-Or choice, and you have to decide which side you're on: liberty or aristocracy? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-22_207_liberty_vs_wealth.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-22_207_liberty_vs_wealth.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Sun, 02 Apr 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy “Equality” is not found in America's legal prerogatives except as it applies to Equal Protection, and as regards to liberty, equality means there is no Class system so everyone has equal opportunity to pursue their lives as they see fit, but outcomes will not be equal because life is unequal. The socialist inclination to redefine words includes “equality.” Marxists claim that equality is society's ultimate goal, that all people should be equal, and that what we call liberty is causing the inequality. "Equality" is perverted to mean equality of outcome: that subjective effort dictates the reward, not objective success. Equality of outcome means the very existence of inequality is proof that an obligation exists, such that people are responsible not for their own actions, but for the actions of others. This reverses control from those who have to those who don't, the Marxist credo, “from those according to their ability, to those according to their need,” the very antithesis of liberty. The fact is, the entire Equality imperative has its basis in resentment, covetousness & envy, and the hubris of those claiming the ability to determine equality seems limitless. The arguments used to support the Equalist ideology are that any differences between people is due to discrimination, that sons are responsible for the sins of their father, and victimized people be made “equal” by giving them preferential treatment. A real example is: since engineers are predominately men, and nurses are predominately women, this is proof of discrimination, and since there is some similarity of superficial education metrics, nurses are equal to engineers, and should receive the same rewards. In the Equalist worldview, since people are not responsible for their circumstances, the circumstances must be made equal. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-22_206_liberty_vs_equality.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-22_206_liberty_vs_equality.mp3 3:10 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy America's founding documents enshrine liberty & justice in no uncertain terms: "liberty" is a person makes their own decisions & the reaps the rewards or suffers the consequences thereof; while "justice" is that we are all the same under The Law, responsible for our own actions. However, as usual, Collectivists distort the definition of justice into something that suits their Blame agenda, such that “social justice” becomes a direct challenge to personal liberty. Social justice is a euphemism for cultural Marxism, the idea that the only way people become very successful is to steal opportunity from someone else less fortunate. It's an obvious reversal of responsibility from those who have not achieved, applied as obligation onto those that have. So-called, Social Justice Warriors use the tactics of derision, guilt & shunning, combined with incremental pressure on unaccountable government agencies to achieve their goals. They are thoroughly insinuated into public institutions, particularly the Liberal Arts departments of universities, Women's Rights groups, and international organizations. They hijack the word “justice” to acquire its aura, then equate it with the word “fair,” assigning their subjective values for what “fair” is. But justice is not subjective, it is ensconced in The Law, and measured out unequivocally every day in our courts. Justice means we can depend on The Law to unpreferentially adjudicate our grievances, nothing else.   Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-22_205_liberty_vs_justice.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-22_205_liberty_vs_justice.mp3 2:40 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Wed, 29 Mar 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Many people do not actually understand what liberty means: they assume it's a synonym for freedom because the two words are often used together. Foreigners, socialists, also conflate "liberty" with "freedom" and most Western Nations are free, so they say they have liberty too, not understanding the distinction: The West has freedom, only America has liberty. However, more freedom certainly brings more liberty. Here's how socialists interpret liberty: they make the "freedom" confusion, and say socialism creates more freedom for people. For example, Minimum Wage makes The Worker freer; not being held accountable makes people freer; having someone else be responsible for your well-being makes you freer, but that is NOT liberty. Liberty is you are responsible for your own decisions; the obligation is ON YOU. In their bid for control, socialists assign virtue to things that conflict with America's traditional mores & values: instead of aspiration, patriotism & liberty, they espouse freedom from responsibility, social justice & equality of outcome; linguistic deceits incompatible with liberty. The battle for liberty has become a battle for language. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-21_204_liberty_vs_freedom.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-21_204_liberty_vs_freedom.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberty assumes that individuals can make the best decisions for themselves, and benefits those who have advantages such as luck, opportunity & competence. This has a tendency to concentrate the financial rewards of liberty into the hands of a minority of Americans, but everyone else's boat continues rising with the rising tide. The socialist World considers this stance to be selfish, and claim “unfairness” is an issue. They assume that individuals cannot be trusted to know what is fair, so the elites must decide what is fair for everyone, and they make the decisions for you. Americans are schizophrenic about socialism: on the one hand, we're a nation founded on liberty, the opposite of socialism, but we are also a deeply religious nation steeped in socialist rhetoric, and many Americans are uncomfortable admitting that liberty actually sounds a lot like selfishness. The ideology of liberty makes you the sovereign of your own universe, accountable first to yourself, and secondarily to other people, an implied contractual alliance rather than as partners as socialists believe. The difference between liberty & selfishness is that, as allies, we recognize the legitimate claim others have for protecting their own liberty, and that we treat others as we would like to be treated, with courtesy, dignity, respect & acquiescence towards a common law, which curiously enough, also reflects religious doctrine. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-21_203_liberty_vs_selfishness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-21_203_liberty_vs_selfishness.mp3 2:17 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Sat, 25 Mar 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberty is when the wants of the individual come first unless overridden by Due Process of Law. Liberty is bottom-up government which leaves individuals to make choices for themselves. America defaults to liberty which makes it the only Liberty Nation, however, that was only possible because when The Constitution was written, women, slaves & the disadvantaged were not among the ratifiers. Now, 250 years later, all the folks who would benefit from the redistribution of wealth want to switch to socialism. Socialism does indeed serve the group better, but of course, at the expense of the individual. Before the fall of the Soviet Union in 1992, America didn't have many socialists because every child was indoctrinated against communism. Even now, collectivists deny they are “socialists” because they do not like the taint on the word, but about half the nation is collectivist, certainly the majority of the Democratic Party. Bennie Sanders, an avowed socialist, won many States in his quixotic quest for the presidency, and the tide of socialism is getting stronger as wealth inequality increases. The reason America has been able to maintain its Liberty Nation status is because Americans are raised to be risk-takers & gamblers; just look at the popularity of both, and if the odds are acceptable, like perhaps one-in-four of us can achieve financial success, and the downside is not that bad, meaning there is a sufficient Social-Safety-Net, Americans will vote to keep liberty. However, liberty is always at risk because socialism is appealing to the majority of Americans who will never enter the upper echelons of success, and democracy is a politics of numbers. If people who believe that liberty is the best ideology for America do not defend their position by convincing the majority of people that liberty is best for them too, we will all be socialists soon. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-21_202_liberty_nation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-21_202_liberty_nation.mp3 2:54 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Once upon a time, America had a single overriding ideology... Liberty, the idea that people should make decisions for themselves, and reap the benefits or suffer the consequences of their own actions. The Constitution guarantees liberty, and the Pledge of Allegiance aspires to “liberty for all.” Thomas Jefferson & James Madison enshrined the concept of liberty during our country's founding, and every single American president since just assumed that America was a nation of liberty. The fact is, America is the only Liberty nation in the world because we make liberty the primary objective, all other countries being some form of collectivism. An attorney must use the word "liberty" as it will be enforced in a court of law. From Black's Law Dictionary: Liberty: Freedom from arbitrary or undue external restraint, esp. by a government.Natural liberty: The power to act as one wishes, without any restraint or control, unless by nature.Personal liberty: One's freedom to do as one pleases, limited only by the government's right to regulate the public health, safety, and welfare. Often The Left or The Right will claim there is some mystical power that supersedes or modifies what "liberty" means but then those folks end up in court where Black's Law Dictionary prevails. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-21_201_what_is_liberty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2017-03-21_201_what_is_liberty.mp3 2:15 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberty, politics, humor no Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:36:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Who would have known when we started that you would be bombarded with all of these provocative concepts that explain the secrets of the world, yet there's still more: 1. The manifestations of self-reliance change with the times. 2. Productivity is the single most important ingredient of a vibrant, growing society. 3. Public campaign financing is one group of people trying to force their beliefs onto another. 4. Demonstrations by those who abuse the courtesy of others are counterproductive. 5. Oil is the closest thing to a magic elixir the world has ever known. 6. Middle Class is more a perception than a number. 7. Home ownership may no longer be part of The American Dream. 8. Toll roads are a great deal for The Rich. 9. Walmart is the physical battle-line between liberty & socialism. And remember: you may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-17_200_bicentennial.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-17_200_bicentennial.mp3 2:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 12 Feb 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The anti-Walmart meme is a confusing one: the people complaining about Walmart openly admit they don't shop or work there, nor would they ever acknowledge to ever even being in one, but the whole idea of Walmart has their indignation-meter pegged. Apparently, they know-better-than the people who actually like Walmart, and because paternalism is their stock-n-trade, they must save those people from themselves: obviously Walmart-haters are socialists. I never used to shop at Walmart but I make it a point to be for whatever the thugs are against, so now I'm a loyal Walmart shopper, among other places that make the customer the center of their business model. Walmart is extremely well managed, it has a great return policy that engenders loyalty, it's clean, organized, ubiquitous, innovative, shows backbone against Political Correctness, and customers feel assured that the prices are very good if not the best, so average people feel comfortable shopping at Walmart. What's not to like? Well, lack of pretensions mostly. Stores that sell prestige, which is what many socialists aspire to, have a difficult time competing with Walmart: not enough people are willing to pay the status premium. Plus, Walmart is ambitious, which means competitors have to be ambitious too: another thing that conflicts with the leisure nirvana socialists are after. Also, a lot of the so-called “labor movement” depends on rent-seeking, the PC word for extortion, to keep wages artificially high, hours short, effort minimal, and resentment against owners turned up full-blast. Walmart is anathema to their plans. Walmart is simply the brick-n-mortar battleground of ideology: liberty in the form of customer first verses socialism as determined by people-who-know-better-n-me. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-17_199_walmart.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-17_199_walmart.mp3 3:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Walmart, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 10 Feb 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy A freeway costs a billion dollars but if enough people use it, the cost per mile is low & folks are willing to pool their resources via taxes to build it, and as long as the freeway is “free,” the societal calculations make sense. Beaches have already been determined to be community assets and force public access: The Rich can't rope them off for their exclusive use. Access across rivers, across deserts, and into cities is almost the same thing but without a citizen's lobby pushing back, we seem to be losing that Right of access due to toll roads. Toll roads are the very definition of “rent-seeking.” There is no arguable reason that toll roads should exist except government collusion with private business. Private toll roads have an entirely adverse impact on the economics of society. Toll roads rely on high volume to finance them & the tolls often add up to a significant portion of a Middle Class wage-earner's income. On-the-other-hand, a toll road is a fantastic deal to The Rich: the tolls themselves are a negligible part of their income while the benefits are staggeringly good: convenience, increased economic activity for their business, efficiency, speed & comfort. The Rich don't care how much tolls are, they simply look at all the regular people clogged up in the cheap lanes with no concept of how all those people made it possible for The Rich to get fast access at the expense of everyone else. No math explains this obvious handout to The Rich, and nothing is more blatantly exploitative: if the people paying those go-fast tolls were actually paying the real cost of transit, the amount would be in the hundreds of dollars, possibly thousands. Worst of all, privatizing a public freeway is completely criminal and against the public's interest. Politicians guilty of this travesty are as guilty as any bandit, and should be imprisoned, possibly executed. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-17_198_toll_roads.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-17_198_toll_roads.mp3 2:49 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash toll roads, tolls, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 08 Feb 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy At some point, The American Dream included owning your own home. It used to be that your house factored into your self-image. Part of this was probably due to America's abundant space, inexpensive building materials & lax regulation, which made modern, fully-equipped houses relatively inexpensive. However, after the 2008 crash, largely as a result of a housing bubble, plus the modest prospects of the Millennial generation, the ideal of owning a house, especially a large one, is no longer as important. In fact, many Millennials eschew home ownership, and denigrate people who have what they call “McMansions.” This attitude is reflected in the Millennials' iconic television programs: Friends, How I Met Your Mother, and endless other narratives of single people living together in apartments. A status shift has occurred which will impact cities & suburbs in the future. The traditional value of single-family home ownership comes from after WWII, which was a couple generations ago, and there is special income tax deductions as an incentive to buy a house. Certainly construction is good for the economy, but home ownership may no longer be a valid redistribution of wealth because Millennials don't own homes; well-off Gen-Xers & Baby-Boomers do. Millennials are more into Urban areas, apartment living & mass transit but these things don't get tax incentives. The anger from Millennials & their call for getting rid of all deductions is because they can't take advantage of them. Millennials, by-in-large, were never able to enter the Middle Class, even with college degrees, even after doing what society told them was good & proper like owning a house. There will always be new home construction in areas where people migrate to but the boom of previous decades is over. Home ownership simply does not make sense to the average young American. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-17_197_home_ownership.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-17_197_home_ownership.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash home ownership, houses, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There's lots of talk about the Middle Class and everyone seems to think they're in it. Other than the mega-rich, even the wealthy consider themselves Middle Class, and The Poor feel like they are essentially Middle Class or close, like owning a cell phone, a car, having a place to live & eating Fast Food. The reality is that the Middle Class is actually a perception brought on by our ever increasing standard of living, and everyone thinks they're in the Middle Class until they're convinced they aren't by the media which shows another, presumably better, richer lifestyle. However, economists have a mathematical description of the Middle Class that as a percentage shows that it is shrinking when it should be getting bigger. Where is the Middle Class going? Well, The Rich are getting richer is the major reason all the brackets are skewing, and what used to be the Middle Class sinks lower and lower. Plus, every time wealth goes through the Market machine, more & more of it goes to The Rich, leaving less, as a percentage, to everyone else. The Rich use the increasing standard of living as a smokescreen but math is math & facts are facts: we are better off but we're getting less and less of the booty. This can't go on forever because wealth provides opportunity, and opportunity provides liberty... Until it's gone. A society with extremes of wealth is a de facto Class system, meaning that eventually opportunity becomes almost nil outside of luck & romance novels. The solution is progressive tax rates that would lower returns for The Rich, knocking them out of line so that the next person gets a shot at the brass ring, and so on down, dragging more & more people back into the Middle Class. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-16_196_middle_class.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-16_196_middle_class.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Middle Class, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 04 Feb 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Oil is miraculous. In the beginning is was literally free, unlimited energy. It could be easily pumped out of the ground for nothing & used in motors without refining. It's liquid at room temperature, can be handled by untrained people, easy to transport, and only a handful can move a two-ton vehicle two miles. And this doesn't even mention all the other things oil is used for, like plastic, fertilizer, lubricants, dyes & medicines. Replacing oil is a monumental challenge. It's unfortunate that we literally burn oil because it’s cheap. The issue irrationally galvanizes public opinion because though people pay more for bottled water than they do gasoline, they somehow think they’re being stolen from when gasoline prices rise. I’m prosaic about any looming energy crisis because it'll take care of itself: when oil finally runs out or gets too expensive then we'll switch to a variety of alternatives, none as good as oil, but improving technology will get close, and if Climate Change gets bad enough, we may even finally switch to clean nuclear, but it seems unlikely our dependence on oil will diminish anytime soon: it's just too magical. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-16_195_oil.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-16_195_oil.mp3 2:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash oil, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 02 Feb 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Today's protests are reminiscent of the turbulent 1960s heyday, but any comparison lacks the context of the time. People still had to fear the police in 1960, the protesters didn't feel a sense of entitlement or even safety, nor were they empowered, which was usually why folks in the past demonstrated in the first place. Back then, the movement leaders were articulate rising-stars, but current protesters appear to be little more than immature bullies & thugs, and when they speak, their sophomoric rhetoric actually condemns their cause. And rather than heroic coverage in an honorable media, we get shaky cell-phone video, and slanted sensationalist stories from admittedly biased news sources. That largest, most reported protesters are identity groups, like Gay Pride, Black Lives Matter & public employees. Their causes seem selfish & narrow. Protesters need to be more than pampered, too-much-leisure-time college students looking for activism selfies to post on Facebook. For example, the inchoate Occupy Movement seemed doomed from the start, and exploited the courtesy of others past the breaking point: what small amount of support the average citizen might have held towards their cause was totally counteracted by their disgust. In fact, the courtesy of the whole nation took a hit from that fiasco, and any support for future, possibly sincere, protests will have to be doubly earned. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-16_194_protesters.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-16_194_protesters.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash protests, protesters, demonstrations, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 31 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The arguments used to promote public financing of political campaigns is that money drowns out competing voices, and the Marxist idea that all candidates should start on a equal playing field. Some cities, like Seattle, have added a tax to Real Property to finance local candidates. But why are property owners specifically responsible for democracy? And it has the debate fallacy that it only addresses money but no amount of money can beat an entrenched incumbent. Not to mention that successful candidates are more the product of Special Interests than money. Will the taxes have to continually be raised to meet the requirements of megabuck campaigns with engorged fields of potential free-money-seeking candidates? Other implications of public campaign financing are very concerning, starting with the idea that people without money are more deserving of elective office. And what about the advantages of church affiliation, appearance, speaking skill, populist pandering, age, luck, party anointing, etc.? These things are all just as powerful, if not more powerful than money: are those constituencies going to be forced to spread their endorsements around? Why should we be shoring up the financial weaknesses of the one side without contributing to the populist attractiveness of the other? The concept of public campaign financing is simply a socialist tactic to try and stack the deck in their favor, the populist equivalent of voter suppression laws. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-16_193_public_c_aign_financing.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-16_193_public_c_aign_financing.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash public campaign financing, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 29 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Productivity is the secret of societal bliss, resulting in a vibrant society focused on progress and scientific knowledge. When people have a motive to work, normally they can produce at least enough to survive, and because of specialization & mechanical leverage, the productivity of a single individual far exceeds their basic needs. In fact, members of our society are so productive that we can consume amounts in vast excess of the food, heat, and shelter we actually need to sustain us which allows us to spread around the excess. We have multiples of everything, and collect superfluous accouterments in unwieldy quantities, so-much-so that capitalism and consumerism have become synonymous. There is nothing innately wrong with consumerism based on productivity: to-the-contrary, it uniquely satisfies our base cravings for accumulation of wealth & the luxury of ambition, both based on motives of greed, vanity & covetousness. Technology is the primary multiplier of productivity because, if anything, America's productivity through labor has decreased: fewer hours, a shorter work week, and more vacation & sick days. But that's actually a good thing because it leaves more time for leisure, which creates its own industry that employees people who no longer can get a job doing what machines do. This ever-increasing amount of leisure & pursuit of personal satisfaction fits right into our national goal of “the pursuit of happiness,” and contrary to all the hand-wringing about unemployment, the future is bright. And as long as America produces more than it consumes, our standard of living will increase & a redistributive society is possible, but the threat exists where our population is trained to be consumers without being at least as productive. This can easily occur if the ideology becomes that people are owed rather owing, the basic tenet behind Marxism. This reversal of responsibility & control stifles motivation & suppresses productivity. Lowered productivity means fewer goods are available, which drives up demand & prices, and if inflation is not allowed because of a government mandate to ensure “equality” then the goods will simply cease to become available at all, and more draconian measures will need to be implemented. Obviously, liberty requires productivity. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-15_192_productivity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-15_192_productivity.mp3 3:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash productivity, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 27 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Is there still as much emphasis on self-reliance as there was in the past or was that simply the mythology of my youth? Perhaps the idea of “helicopter parents” is a media creation but probably they're actually helpful in promoting their child's future. I also wonder if there's a correlation between self-reliance & ideology? Self-reliance is certainly essential to liberty. What is self-reliance anyway, and how does it manifest itself today? Traveling requires self-reliance: if anything, travel is on the increase. Extreme Sports require a major dose of self-reliance along with self-confidence. Using technology peaks among younger people & that's mostly self-entertainment, an important component of self-reliance. Everyday modern life requires a sophistication that was just not part of the past: people no longer have to hunt for food or die of exposure, but that's a kind of self-reliance we can do without. The number of people who are not married, do not have kids & do not have their own home, may be the false indicators that the older generation is applying to those younger than them. No one any longer needs to know how to fix a car, or even how to check the dipstick, but they do need to know how to pay their bills online & find the best goods for the best price among websites. There are more advanced degrees given out now not because it's easier but because of the increasing caliber of students. There is more specialization, so generalization suffers, so fewer people can do everything which probably skews the perception of less self-reliance. It takes self-reliance for people to leave the protection of their churches or the sentimentality of their society, which makes me think self-reliance is actually on a steep upswing. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-15_191_self-reliance.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-15_191_self-reliance.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash self-reliance, self reliance, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 25 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Our discovery of original political & philosophical concepts now numbers in the 100s, let's review the most recent ones: 1. Casual relationships are easy to maintain because they don't cost much, but sincere relationships are expensive. 2. Hyphenated-Americans are primarily seeking control, putting a cohesive society at risk. 3. The American Dream means liberty to most Americans, but that's definitely not universal. 4. Emergent Order means that complex things organize themselves, and is the fundamental science supporting liberty. 5. Courtesy is the grease that facilitates a civil society, but is often abused in our uncivil one. 6. Apologies create victims by assigning perpetrators. 7. Basic Human Rights are as fictional as the Ten Commandments. 8. Age-based maturity is paternalistic leverage The Old use to control The Young. 9. Obesity is the new normal. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-15_190_new_concepts_vol_17.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-15_190_new_concepts_vol_17.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 23 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy "Obesity" is a medical term that means a person is more than just fat, and the term “morbidly obese” basically equates to death. The vast majority of Americans are fat, and almost 40% are obese. Unlike in the past, there's no public shame to being obese, and judging by the number of obese people, over 60% of the population in some places, trying to stay thin isn't even a common goal. People used to control their weight by moderate eating but food is so inexpensive now, and so available, and advertised so effectively, and so yummy, that the average person doesn't have the will power to resist. So many people are obese it has become the new normal, and a new kind of political correctness has arisen that makes irresponsibility & poor judgment about your weight a badge of honor. Obese people are refusing to take doctor's advice to lose weight, citing "fat-shaming." In fact, some are claiming that obesity is a statement of social justice. It's a kind of NewSpeak: fat is the new thin. It's hopeless: half of the people who get bariatric surgery gain it back in 2 years. Until there's a drug that loses weight, it won't happen. Almost: if Government made weight loss a national priority, after all it's a much bigger health risk than cancer, then develop, champion & nationalize any anti-fat drugs & protect them from liability, and embed the goal into Obamacare, we could lighten the problem of obesity, so to speak. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-15_189_obesity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-15_189_obesity.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash obesity, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 21 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Age in America takes on an importance way beyond anything else because if you are the right age, young or old, you get free money. More importantly, if you have sex with someone that has not hit an arbitrary age set by the State, you could go to prison for years & be marked as a sex offender for life. The Old exploit their voting power by impressing a list of age-appropriate maturities on The Young. They set varied & incongruent limits on personal liberty of the young: can't vote, can't drink, can't drive, can't have sex, and can't smoke, until they reach a certain age, yet hypocritically, The Old have no problem throwing 18-year olds in front of cannons. In fact, until the 26th Amendment in 1971, 18-year olds could be drafted but could not vote. The excuse that The Old use to oppress The Young is they don't have the “maturity” to make these important choices for themselves, but that is an obviously fallacious argument. If The State has a concern to force people not to act until they've reached "maturity," we've got to be scientific about it, and let's take out the guesswork & institute testing: want to drink when you're 16 & can pass the test, then go for it: you'll be the equal to a European 16-year old. We already have a driving test but should there be a smoking test? There definitely needs to be a "get drafted" test, and why is there no parenting test? Forced birth control until age 21 seems like the most rational State concern of all, and for some people, they'll never be mature enough to raise children. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-14_188_maturity.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-14_188_maturity.mp3 2:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash maturity, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 19 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Mysticism creeps into politics from both sides: the religious conservatives have a list of tenets that God delivered & the collectivists, who are often atheists, have their own divine revelations, a belief that human beings and possibly animals are born with Rights, though it's not so clear where they came from? In a traditional liberal democracy, Rights come from The Law & are enforced by threat of violence, but the collectivists think that Rights are inherent at birth and people naturally obey them unless they are corrupted by outside forces such as Capitalism. Only in a wealthy society that protects its innocents can such naivete flourish. As usual, what's one person's “basic human right” is another person's convenience. I don't murder my neighbor, not because God told me not to or I was born a pacifist, but because we both made a deal not to harm one another, and we both benefit greatly from that deal. Don't be fooled though, there are those whose short term gain or selfishness would entice them to kill you if they thought the rewards outweighed the penalties. And even unthinkable violations of basic human rights, like rape & child molestation, are rampant in some cultures. Basic Human Rights are an imaginary construct arising from nowhere & supported by nothing, but I'm sure there are some folks in the Basic Human Rights camp that are rarin' to send in the troops because there's lots of crazy things happening around the world that irritate their mystical sensibilities. However, sending young Americans to die in far away lands for vague ideals is no longer fashionable. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-14_187_basic_human_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-14_187_basic_human_rights.mp3 2:45 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash basic human rights, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 17 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The problem with unwritten rules, called values & morals, is that they can easily be exploited, either through leverage or because of lack of formal enforcement. Apologies are part of the courtesy ritual: rather than duel due to a slight of honor, both sides simply apologized: no cost in blood or treasure yet effective, but courtesy is in decline & apologies are no longer free. Forcing people to apologize is an American tradition and has far-reaching and subtle implications, often leading to claims of victimhood & a desire for compensation or other special treatment. Nowadays, if you apologize, you are essentially admitting culpability and open yourself for civil retribution & social stigma. Because apologies are ingrained into us from childhood, most people are oblivious to their own cuckolding, and will not dodge even obvious extortionary agendas. Apologies are a method of seeking control, and if you apologize you relinquish control. Unfortunately, the solution is to no longer indoctrinate children with the practice. We need to teach kids that subtle line between where common courtesy crosses into an apology obligation because the social lubrication that apologies used to provide have become suspect, and the price of apologizing has simply become too high. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-14_186_apologies.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-14_186_apologies.mp3 2:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash apology, apologies, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 15 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Courtesy is when people try to reciprocate their own comfort by making other people comfortable. It's one of the “values” that people are always harping about, yet they rarely defend, and many abuse it. We can only be in the company of strangers through unwritten & unenforced courtesy, otherwise we would travel with swords, and in fact, one of the reasons people push for the right to carry guns is because they feel anxious in company of discourteous people: vocal protestors, ubiquitous panhandlers, aggressive drivers, loud music, and all the inconveniences of modern life that would be made less obtrusive through, increasingly uncommon, courtesy. Courtesy works best if we indoctrinate our youth but because we don't, political correctness & aggressive activism have made courtesy into a handicap. The fact is, now we need to teach children how to combat against discourtesy, and not have their own courtesy exploited. Shaming, shunning & ridicule are not effective antidotes, and any kind of engagement just plays into the hands of the courtesy-gamers. The best defense is recognizing what is happening to us: courtesy can only be exploited if we let it be. Stop commenting on those click-bait websites, refuse to be raucous at a demonstration, don't give beggars money, tell the person that is cutting in line that they are being rude & if you have to, call an usher. Courtesy needs to be taught in school, and the penalty for the discourteous needs to be an quick electric zap. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-14_185_courtesy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-14_185_courtesy.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash courtesy, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 13 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The concept of spontaneous order, self-organization out of chaos, is the underpinning theory of liberty & Free Markets. It was first postulated in 300 BC by Chinese philosopher Zhuangzi, and modernized in the 20th Century by Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek. When you look into the sky and see an elegantly organized flock of birds, all in intricate synchronization, it illustrates the concept of Emergent Order: those individual birds have no leader, there is no grand top-down design. Life is immensely complicated, and like the newest evolution of computer intelligence, we've found that high-granularity, autonomous decision-making is the most successful strategy for solving complex problems. This makes it almost impossible for fields such as economics to claim legitimacy because those theories are often post hoc narratives of how an event supposedly occured, of which there may be many other narratives that are equally likely, a much more difficult propostion than predicting the weather. Even though those who try and predict the outcome of chaos are doomed to failure, some humans suffer under the delusion that they have godlike prescience and know-better-n-you. In fact, some say they actually talk to God, while others claim to know what is the-most-good-for-the-most-people. Beware these false prophets in whatever trappings they assume, usually socialist, but people looking for certainty in leadership will also fall prey to the deception. The idea of Emergent Order makes us feel uncomfortable because to accept it is to place yourself at the mercy of chance, that there is no fate, and that luck actually controls your life not you. From that vantage point, all the things you do to succeed is simply buying more lottery tickets: your odds go up but there is certainly no guarantee you'll be anything more than a single successful sperm out of 10s of millions that gave it go. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-13_184_emergent_order.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-13_184_emergent_order.mp3 3:03 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash emergent order, order from chaos, spontaneous order, self-organization, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy “The American Dream” has at least two meanings & probably more depending on who you talk to. Most of us think the meaning we were raised with is the only one, and we are surprised when we use the phrase in debate but the other side seems confused. My meaning, the traditional liberty meaning, is that The American Dream is to aspire to have as much control over your own life as possible. This may mean a small business for most, but building a nest-egg at a firm then retiring early is a close second. Of course, there are also folks who love what they do & want to be able to do it until they drop which is their version of The American Dream. Basically, to us liberalists, The American Dream is making our own decisions, doing what we want & accruing the benefits or suffering the consequences as the case may be, which isn't necessarily easy nor comfortable. But socialists have an entirely different definition: to them, comfort & security are important. They don't want to feel intimidated by the accomplishments of others, and they find ambition & pride appalling. Their view of The American Dream is so askew to the traditional view that they actually look to other nations for their model. This would be of no concern to most of us because we follow the liberal principle of “live & let live,” but socialist ideology is top-down, do-as-we-say, so if we are to keep The American Dream alive, we're going to have to fight for it. Granted, increasing disparate wealth accumulation & globalism has narrowed the opportunities for such a large portion of our population that to them socialism seems the only solution, so part of keeping The American Dream is fixing that problem. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-13_183_the_american_dream.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-13_183_the_american_dream.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash the American Dream, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 09 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy At the start of the previous century, Teddy Roosevelt used to rail about "hyphenated Americans" ruining our national integrity, and indeed the idea of a "melting pot" came from that time: no matter where you came from, you integrated into society, and we were all Americans. In fact, the most successful countries income equality-wise are the most homogeneous, like Finland. Now though, the Social Justice Warriors & diversity have taken over. The minority have leveraged their power to overwhelm the majority. Apparently, Americans now aspire to their differences, and there is no better indicator that you are more different than extra letters in your title: to become a hyphenated-American. The most powerful thing anybody can give themselves is a title. Not only can it define you in whatever preconceptions the title implies, but it can literally give you control: people naturally assume the “director” is in charge, and the “doctor” knows what they're talking about. The best titles let you assign your own honors & have a way to force those concepts onto others. Hyphenated-Americans exploit courtesy & Political Correctness to provide subtle control because it puts them in charge of how they are referred to. Plus, it makes them special, possibly deserving of preferential treatment. Hyphenated-Americans want to claim more, they want to split their allegiance, taking on the positive attributes & claims of the hyphen without any of the responsibility. Their name becomes a constant advertisement of the goods they're selling, often resulting in monetary reward . Hyphenation is also a subtle insult to the unhyphenated people, and forms divisions: those with hyphens verses those without. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-13_182_hyphenated-americans.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-13_182_hyphenated-americans.mp3 3:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash hyphenated Americans, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 07 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Relationships are life's greatest source of control: at every contact we try to determine who is in charge. Positive relationships that you want to continue show an acceptance of this hierarchy, and the most successful relationships have an easy exchange of control. A good relationship is comfortable and provides something positive to both parties. Unfortunately, people abuse & exploit relationships, especially anonymous ones like between the State & its citizens. In such relationships the rules must be detailed, petty & strict, which we would find totally abhorrent in a personal relationship. The very impartiality of government undermines the cohesion & effectiveness of society. Simple friendship is purchased: it's bought with time, entertainment, or money but it is bought. You must be aware of this if you want to establish or maintain a relationship. At first, establishing the relationship is relatively inexpensive because of the entertainment value from both parties, but that sense of discovery, which initially has tremendous value, diminishes rapidly as the personality & circumstances of the other party materialize. It then becomes an effort to maintain the relationship because you are now expending some value, and must make allowances for the other person's wants & desires. Marriages are prone to fail for exactly this reason, and without romantic love, an evolved trait which is short-lived, there would probably be no marriages. The default relationship between strangers is adversarial, then closer contact usually moves the relationship into a truce, and after more time some clannish friendship develops that occasionally evolves into personal friendship. Without courtesy & social wariness, people's natural base impulses of envy & resentment with turn them into instant enemies. Add the fact that failed friendships make the worst enemies and it is easy to see that friendships are few but enemies are many, and that friends decrease with time but enemies accumulate. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-13_181_relationships.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-13_181_relationships.mp3 3:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash relationships, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 05 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Who knew there could be so many unique & original ideas you had never heard before? Let's review: 1. Anyone who says they can predict the future is lying to get control over you. 2. When the inevitably economic collapse comes, America can use the upheaval to make some needed changes to its Constitution. 3. Climate-denial is a tactic whose intent is to stymie forces using the alarm for socialist subterfuge. 4. Public Transportation outside of metropolitan areas is part of the Poor People industry, and could be better performed with modern technologies. 5. Cap & Trade is a socialist scheme meant to redistribute Wealth from the U.S. to the Third World. 6. Nuclear energy is the scientific solution to the energy problem; any other proposed solution is political. 7. The value of space exploration is to spark the imagination & interest of budding scientists & engineers. 8. China is a Communist nation that uses Capitalism as a weapon against Capitalists. 9. Modern, supposedly non- profit charities are little more than usurious rackets. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_180_new_concepts_vol_16.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_180_new_concepts_vol_16.mp3 2:18 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 03 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy No concept has been quite so distorted, exploited & co-opted as charity, wrapped up as it is in religion, morals, paternalism, indoctrination, shunning, guilt & sympathy. Modern charitable organizations are mostly irredeemable, cynically used to cover for those whose intent is to extract wealth & self-esteem from others for themselves, and any intended beneficiaries assume a secondary role. There is no justification that allows 90% of donated funds to go into overhead, whatever scheme is being proposed or defended is de facto dishonest. Charity has become an industry as usurious as the worst mafia extortion racket. Worst of all, charity has become a method of control, both of the recipients & of the donors. Charities have no claim on you: they are simply someone else trying to impose their value system onto you. The worst kind claim their moral legitimacy overrides market forces feedback. They want to get paid the same as the private sector, advertise like the private sector, even raise money through the markets but without any form of oversight. And they use insult & derision as leverage, publicly calling people who don't contribute “cheap.” Hey, person of suspect motives, I respect you if you volunteer for your cause, but if you're under the false assumption that what you do is important to anyone else but yourself then that's all hubris on your part. Really, charity should be provided by retired people & people with underutilized skills. It shouldn't be a mechanism for conniving people to gain control over others or to set the agenda of what they consider important. I have no greater disdain than for sanctimonious twits who know-better-n-me. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_179_usurious_charities.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_179_usurious_charities.mp3 2:47 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash usurious, charity, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 01 Jan 2017 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Market purists aren't sure what to make of China: on-the-one-hand, it's a Communist nation, but-on-the-other, they are cutthroat, no-holds-barred Capitalists using Market Theory to drag their multi-billion human nation from the Dark Ages into the forefront of modernity. Socialists are also in a quandary: on-the-one-hand, it's a Communist nation which is a positive for them, but-on-the-other, there is vast income disparity & inequality. Neither of the two extremes care much about liberty nor Civil Rights, so China usually escapes international censure when there's a Tiananmen Square incident. China also throws the “Free” Traders for a loop because they exploit the greed of the West without reciprocation. For example, China doesn't allow foreign companies to own control of their subsidiaries in China; China doesn't allow foreign powers to own their nation's natural resources; Chinese goods are always cheaper through currency manipulation; and Chinese consumers are indoctrinated to buy only Chinese goods. Also, China is effectively a World Power through trade without having to commit its blood or gold to foreign adventures. They eschew the role of World policeman, gladly leaving America stranded in that quagmire, and proving a nation need not look beyond its own borders for dominion nor feel concerned about the affairs of people's not its own. And if they want something like the South China Sea, they just take it. Who's going to stop them? China is a World Power without even trying. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_178_china.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_178_china.mp3 2:24 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash China, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 30 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The U.S. put a man on the moon from nothing in 1961 to "before the end of the decade" in 1969, less than 10 years, but it's been estimated it would take 10-15 years to put a man on the moon today because of safety, or whatever, I'm not quite sure? You'd think all the specialization & fixation on perfection would payoff somehow in space but we've become a society of automatons, our imagination captured by videogames & unemployment, everyone thinking someone else is doing better than they are. In fact, space has been co-opted by The Rich & private interests who want to make it into a tourist attraction. Imagination has value, mostly entertainment but it is also an important part of problem solving. Obviously age-appropriate imagination must be fostered & encouraged in children that naturally leads them into a career path they would find enjoyable. There's a reason police, fireman & astronauts have traditionally been America's go-to childhood heroes, way more positive role-models than athletes or entertainers, but the “social networking” generation is getting behind the curve. Every 8th-grader has a YouTube channel with 100,000 subscribers, and the last guy in space retired when he came home. Russia, China, Japan & India all seem to be keeping their meager Space programs alive but America is having trouble convincing its leaders that exploration into space provides its own reasons, the most important of which is in the imagination of those same 8th-graders. Right now, the mainstream media steers every kid towards being famous; instead let's go to mars and create 100,000 new scientists & engineers. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_177_space_exploration.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_177_space_exploration.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash space exploration, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 28 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy My generation of Americans was absolutely traumatized by the word “nuclear.” As a grade-schooler in Nevada, we practiced “duck-and-cover” several times a year which was supposed to protect us from earthquakes and atomic bombs. Even though our teachers reassured us the possibility of either was remote, impressionable young children cannot make such sophisticated distinctions, so we lived in constant fear of dying a horrible death from invisible rays that rotted our bodies from the inside. Consequently, my generation has an instilled fear of anything nuclear clear out of rational perspective of the facts. The ridiculous result is that we would rather burn our natural resources, pouring millions of tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, leading to a nightmare scenario very similar to the one we feared as children from nuclear. Large power grids of wires running across the countryside seem so 20th Century. When the crunch comes, Middle Class people will spend what it takes to create & store their own power, probably via solar, but what about all the people in the cities, and those who can't afford to be their own energy barons? If the Climate Change alarmists are right, burning hydrocarbons is no longer a solution, but third-generation small, buried, single-purpose degradable nuclear reactors certainly are. As it stands, we can't even have the discussion even though it's the perfect solution for developing nations, and even though advanced nations like France have already been successful with old-style nukes. Nuclear-fearmongers seem to have a lot in common with terrorism-fearmongers, and both ill serve the nation & the World. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_176_nuclear_energy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_176_nuclear_energy.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash nuclear power, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 26 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Always be suspicious when apocalyptic predictions come out of no where that require the whole world to get involved or some unconscionable calamity will occur. Climate Change is the current bug-a-boo, but other common themes are epidemics, the population explosion, asteroids, genetically modified insects, or any number of nightmare scenarios that require Americans to give up their liberty and let some over-arching World authority take over for the good of everyone. Be especially careful of solutions that involve ill-defined goals based on debatable, emotionally-charged, uncontrollable factors, which is where Cap & Trade comes under consideration. Cap & Trade creates an artificial, labyrinthine complex, so-called “market” in emission credits to limit greenhouse gases, but in reality it limits nothing, but instead is a wealth transfer from rich nations to poor. Cap & Trade was created by bureaucrats for bureaucrats a couple decades ago, and was even adopted for a short period by some countries, such as Australia, that quickly abandoned the whole enterprise when its predictable flaws became woefully obvious. Worldwide Cap & Trade would be prone to exploitation at best, but most probably would result in criminality, outrage, and increased human discord. Whatever Cap & Trade’s intended purposes are for saving the world, it's more likely an engineering nightmare and political cancer. Whatever solution Americans finally adopted to limit greenhouse gases, the inevitable tax money it generates should stay here, not financing some Third World dictator's lifestyle. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_175_cap__trade.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-12_175_cap__trade.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash cap & trade, cap and trade, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 24 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The argument against driverless cars is similar to protectionism arguments: what about the jobs? And the foes are also similar too: unions, environmentalists who don't like cars in the first place, and socialists who want all people treated the same which is code for mass transit. Foes also include conservatives & other Luddites who are afraid of advancing technology & would rather it happened after they were dead. However, nothing is going to stop the coming of driveless cars because they make sense for a multitude of reasons: they will reduce commuter traffic congestion & improve safety with better driving. Also, driverless cars can replace mass transit because they are more convenient, secure, and they pickup & deliver on target which is better for the handicapped & elderly. Special Interests are going to be dogging every State legislature & City council against driverless cars. It's going to take some federal level action to break status quo., and in fact, a $60 million prize is waiting for the city that designs the best plan for driverless cars, after which the Dept of Transportation will subsidize other cities across the nation to adopt it. 78 cities participated in the contest: for example, Columbus, Ohio’s plan is to build a network of on-demand driverless shuttles for seniors and the disabled, WiFi kiosks would check routes and take fares, transmitters would be installed on thousands of city owned vehicles to automatically route around traffic incidents and major events, and it would gradually expand to include all potential commuters who would find things easier, more convenient & cheaper to simple indicate their travel plans on a smart-phone app and let technology do the rest. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_174_driverless_cars.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_174_driverless_cars.mp3 2:34 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash driverless cars, self-driving vehicles, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 22 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Outside of the major metropolitan areas, the real reason there is a constituency for mass transit is the “poor people” industry: poor people can’t afford cars, old people can’t drive, cars are unsafe, travel distinguishes class, and other subliminal motives. Stripped of self-righteous evangelical fervor, pro-mass transit arguments collapse. Most people are willing to subsidize some amount of public transportation for humanitarian reasons but socialist types argue that the public is entitled to transportation, arrogant “urban planners” say they know what is best for us, and the public employee unions protect their own selfish interests: all of which ultimately cause the concept of public transportation to lose any moral legitimacy. Big buses driving fixed routes is out-of-date, inefficient, ineffective & expensive. It's an anachronism that should be completely dismantled as there are other solutions that solve the problems that mass transit is purported to serve. For example, Smart-phone Ride Apps like Uber & Lyft are available right now & low-income riders could be given a subsidy. The driver would be paid & passengers would have the convenience of being picked up in front of their home & being dropped off exactly where they want to go. At peak times, many drivers would make themselves available because of the work opportunity, while during slow times there would be no high cost infrastructure to support, all due to the magic of Free Markets. Unfortunately, entrenched Special Interests like unions, especially the Public Transportation Union, will adamantly oppose a private sector solution, but the writing is on the wall. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_173_public_transportation.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_173_public_transportation.mp3 2:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash public transportation, mass transit, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 20 Dec 2016 00:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Climate Change denial is a sophisticated tactical position: Climate-deniers don't actually believe their arguments, they simply don't want any of the proposed "solutions" imposed on America, all of which are insidious wealth redistribution schemes. It's easier to deny the whole thing, and it gets an Environmentalist's goat too, which Climate-deniers see as an especially savory benefit. If the debate changed to "prepare for the results of climate change" rather than "America's redistribution responsibility," then the Climate-deniers would probably go along. It's blatantly clear that the Climate-changers are using alarmism for dubious reasons, that the ulterior motive behind the Global Warming movement is a transparent power grab. Much of The World wants their vision to be the archetype: that borders are open, and all nations share in the chaos. Americans don't get it because only a subset of us have socialist leanings, so the majority of us are not aware of the subtext of what The World is proposing: that America should not be a liberty nation, and instead we must do-the-most-good-for-the-most-people. By denying Climate Change the deniers keep a stalemate going with little downside risk to their eyes: if the world is going to die, what can humans do about it? Of course, there is some sincere disbelief that the climate is changing or that humans caused it but that view belongs in the same realm of conspiracy theories. Climate-deniers are simply engaging in Amercain-style leverage politics. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_172_climate-deniers.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_172_climate-deniers.mp3 2:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash climate change, climate deniers, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 18 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy America seems to be teetering on economic collapse: a large portion of the population feels disaffected, there is ever-increasing wealth disparity, grid-locked politics, Crony Capitalism, Climate Change, 10s of millions of people chronically unemployed, National Debt, and most importantly, people simply expect it because everyone has a natural tendency towards pessimism, it's probably evolutionary, and Doom-saying has been a staple in religion for millennia. From the macro perspective, hard times are coming but at the micro perspective, personal satisfaction and happiness with life won’t change too much. Extended families will have to live together with only one car and one “data” cell-phone plan; vacations will just be to Uncle Joe’s house on the river; fraternal and civic organizations will supplant private club memberships; and hollow pretensions will notably disappear. Certainly, science, education, sports, family, community and all the things that affect you personally; those things aren’t going to change in nature, only in specifics. Look how communities reacted during The Depression & WWII. If people are already settled in & mostly homogeneous, getting through very difficult financial times is workable & non-violent. You won't be buying kiwi & "gluten free" food, fewer trips to Jazzercize, only 5 pairs of shoes in the closet, & you'll have to cut down on the double-shot lattes, but medicine, basic food stocks & most institutions, public & private, will continue without much change. Certainly the Internet will exist, along with connectivity enough for social networks. The plain fact is, we need to discard the old ways because our problems are systemic. Nobody wants to give up what they got: the entrenched winners, especially those who are retired & no longer productive to society, have all the power now, and that has to change. When The Collapse comes there will be a chance to reorient.We'll pull through it, and the catastrophe will allow us to have a Constitutional Convention and change a few things. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_171_the_collapse.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_171_the_collapse.mp3 3:06 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash collapse, depression, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 16 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There are a lot of people who are certain they can predict the future. Demagogues are particularly guilty of this personality trait: they make pronouncements about what will happen with no sense of humility nor doubt, constantly claiming some kind of special inborn ability to read people's minds, dissemble hidden motives & project the past into the present, because they want to be the seers & revelators that we all look to for leadership & advice. Politicians, especially, think they can predict the future. They have to because Top-down management only works if you have complete knowledge & know what's going to happen ahead of time, and preemptive war definitely requires being able to predict the future. Since these people think they are the only ones who can do that, it gives them control over the rest of us. The whole Climate-Changer strategy is an example: big emergency that only a special group of people at the top can predict; must implement now; do-as-we-say-because-we-know-best. Socialism rests on the concept of “the common good,” but what is good for one person may not be for another, and those who decide must be able to predict the future. But there is no one who-knows-better-than-you about what you want; there is no one who can make the calculus of “most good to the most people.” What makes liberty great is that we don't depend on others to predict our future. Every person is an expert on themselves and can make the best choice for themselves. Government's job is to facilitate & regulate that process, and keep the dictators off our backs. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_170_predicting_the_future.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_170_predicting_the_future.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash predicting, the future, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 14 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review another batch of original concepts guaranteed to make you sound provocative at a party: 1. Gay marriage is a matter of the law but what you do in your own church is your business. 2. A Liberal Arts education is important to prepare for college but is probably not a sound investment in your career. 3. Prestige degrees exploit the primitive desire for status, and distort the value of a real education. 4. Prohibition against illegal drugs has no rational explanation but ignorance & greed. 5. Prostitution would be legal if it simply had a constituency speaking on its behalf. 6. Medicine is more mysticism than science, and diversity is making it more so. 7. Doctors are no more exceptional than any skilled mechanic. 8. Most prescription drugs are ineffective; simply a racket perpetrated by the pharmaceutical industry. 9. A more apt name for ObamaCare is Obamasurance, and the best that can be said for it is that it was a step in the right direction. 10. Anti-vaccine people are trying to make the world about them. 11. Mental illness is no more prevalent than it ever was but society has become more strict towards its manifestations. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_169_new_concepts_vol_15.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-11_169_new_concepts_vol_15.mp3 2:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy People are no different now than they ever have been, but back-in-the-day, if someone was bipolar or subject to depression, their small community knew about it & would make allowances, and taking care of children or working in the fields was hardly affected by non-physical maladies. In fact, many famous figures in history probably owe their exceptional achievements to mild forms of autism: for example, Thomas Jefferson was thought to have Asperger's, and bipolar people have always been common. A cocaine high is probably the closest feeling to the mania a bipolar person experiences and look how much people are willing to pay to use it. Unfortunately, bipolars have commensurate debilitating depressive episodes which our modern society will not accept. Now-a-days, people are answering product support calls, running tech, or overseeing construction: the same amount of out-of-society's-norm behavior is not possible because it may impact something important. Society's constraints have become very stringent and this has caused the definition of “mental illness” to expand such that a larger portion is now diagnosed as “mentally ill.” 10% of the entire U.S. population is taking some kind of psych drug, and a quarter of all women 40-60 years old are prescribed anti-depressives. Additionally, people can gain control by claiming a mental debilitation: they get sympathy, concern & often monetary reward, the expectations placed on them are reduced & they are not held responsible for their actions, up to & including murder. Combine this with increased anonymity from public censor and the rewards of claiming mental illness outweigh the penalties. Plus, the pharmaceutical industry perceives mental illness as a goldmine: patients must take expensive drugs for life, usually at government expense, even though most drugs don't work for most people. Doctors recognize this trend: the current mental disorder manual had its adoption delayed for years because they thought its description of autism & other vague diagnosis were too broad. Obviously, mental illness is both subjective & relative. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_168_mental_illness.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_168_mental_illness.mp3 3:09 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash mental illness, DSM, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 10 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Everyone wants control, and leveraging society's reverence towards children is a common method to grab it. Combine that with sanctimonious posturing & conspiracy theories and the anti-vaccine movement explains itself. The attraction to pseudoscience is also easy to understand because people want to think they know special information that gives them an advantage, and true science is difficult with lots of people having superior knowledge. Pseudoscience evens the playing field by making it subjective thereby preempting expertise. There are many unsubstantiated claims as to why someone would deny their children the protection of vaccination but the most influential was the totally bogus connection of vaccinations & autism. The fact is, the charlatan doctor who provided the cover for that belief has been censured: not only was his research a complete fraud but he had a company that was supposed to offer an alternative to vaccines so discrediting them would have made him a rich man. He's not a doctor now, got his license stripped, and his paper was the only one ever to be removed from publication. There are seemingly more autistic children now because they live longer, we don't institutionalize them anymore, they are mixing more in the mainstream & society is simply narrowing its definition of what's "normal." The other specious claim, that vaccines aren't 100% safe is also baldly aggressive: the fact is almost all drugs are less "safe" than vaccinations. People claim that forced vaccinations violates their liberty and they are correct but medical treatment is one of the socialist capitulations that overrides liberty. Statistically, a certain percentage of people are required to be vaccinated for it to work for everybody. Unfortunately, some parents think their precious little Johnny is so special that they won't even take the trivial chance of vaccinations: let other less important children do it. The center-of-the-universe aspect of that position is its own mental illness. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_167_anti-vaxx.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_167_anti-vaxx.mp3 3:13 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash anti-vaxx, vaccines, anti-vaccines, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 08 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy ObamaCare is the nickname given the Affordable Care Act but a more appropriate nickname would be “Obamasurance” because it does not provide healthcare, only insurance, and only through private companies, and only to those people who can navigate the relatively difficult steps to obtain it. Not only that, the Affordable Care Act is anything but affordable and does nothing to bring down the costs of healthcare. In fact, by putting a Third Party, the private insurance companies, into the middle, it guarantees healthcare will be even more expensive in the future. What we call "health insurance" today, even the Silver plans, would have been called "catastrophic insurance" 20 years ago because it only applied to very unlikely events. Today's Silver plan deductions are the same as the catastrophic plans of old. Essentially, someone has to spend $5000 before any "insurance" kicks in at all. Consider that a 2-earner Middle Class 3-children family earning $80K a year doesn't qualify for a subsidy, and after a couple years with healthcare's ever increasing costs, insurance will approach $3K/mo with $1000 deductible. With no company footing most of the bill, they simply can't afford it. And those healthcare costs will continue to increase since there is no cost containment. And there's the people against any kind of socialized healthcare. They disingenuously shout "Death Panels," and how doctors don't get paid enough, and how the U.S. leads the world in medicine. All lies & distortions to maintain the status quo, because these are the same people with retirement benefits, Medicare & the VA, so more patients are going to put pressure on their medical resources. They are the ultimate "screw you, I got mine" voting contingent. There is actually less Middle Class healthcare now than before Obamasurance because it costs so much, but the hospital business is booming, the insurance business is booming, and the pharmaceutical & medical supply business are booming: ObamaCare is not socialized healthcare, it's crony capitalism for insurance companies. Insurance & healthcare lobbyists are some of the most powerful Special Interests there are. Whether there's ObamaCare or not, healthcare is going to be out of the reach of most people: it's only a matter of time... Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_166_obamacare.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_166_obamacare.mp3 3:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Obamacare, ACA, Affordable Care Act, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 06 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy No industry has so completely captured its regulators as the pharmaceutical companies. Hidden agendas are in every public pronouncement: drugs need to be expensive to fund research into new ones, foreign drugs can't be trusted, drug trials must be large & time-consuming, government cannot negotiate drug prices, patents may be allowed for drug tweaks, and other subtle monopolistic manipulations. No drug regulation exists except to make pharmaceutical companies wealthier, that's why they are the most profitable business sector this century, and they use the tools of modern marketing to make it that way. In fact, most of what American pharmaceutical companies say is misleading or outright lies: they are not the world-leading innovators they claim to be. 2 of the top 3 largest drug companies are Swiss, half of the top 10 are from countries with socialized medicine, and foreign drug companies spend significantly more on R&D. The sorry situation is that the U.S. is one of the only nations that allow drug advertising, 25% of their revenue, twice the amount they spend on R&D, and mostly they don't even do their own research, instead buying patents from the universities & start-ups. Pharmaceutical companies can get away with this outrage because America accepts marketing, encourages business & is given the panacea of generic drugs to offset the commercialism. For example: Liptor is $194 but its generic is only $16; Plavic is $205 verses $13 for the generic; and the common antibiotic, Cipro, goes from $52 to $7. But generic drugs are mostly a smokescreen: pharmaceuticals simply pay the generic manufacturers not to make drugs. Also, drug lobbyists have corrupted congress to bar import of generics from Europe; even Canadian generics are prohibited. Further legislative corruption actually forbids government from negotiating lower prices for U.S. drugs via normal volume purchases that all other countries benefit from. Even more insidious: since a one-time treatment that cures a patient is not very profitable, drug companies want people to take the drugs more often, preferable forever. Pharmaceutical-financed medical studies have been methodically lowering treatment thresholds in an attempt to include more-n-more people in the lifetime prescription market. Regulatory oversight is captured such that drugs do not need to exhibit any efficacy, and their price is hidden because the hospitals are given steeply discounted versions but the patient's insurance is expected to pay the full premium. And all of this overlooks the fact that most, if not the vast majority, of drugs don't work for most people. There are efficacious drugs, it's better now than the Dark Ages, but mostly what we're getting is a placebo with side-effects. We all want to live forever & will believe anything to do so, especially if we never see the bill. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_165_prescription_drugs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_165_prescription_drugs.mp3 4:53 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash prescription drugs, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 04 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Medicine is a taught skill, not rocket science, and learning medicine needs a total rework. People get into medicine by taking a series of very difficult timed memory tests, exactly the kind of short-term, plastic memory that human beings start losing at about the age 18, and by 35 it is obviously apparent they no longer have: by 50, everyone is stupid if you use a timed memory exam to determine their intelligence. Your 40-year old doctor who went through pre-med & graduated med school at 25 may be a total idiot now because their qualifications are not like other professions that test true intelligence. There are many good doctors because the field attracts intelligent people in the first place, but the adulation that physicians receive is misplaced: if you're going to idolize intelligence then look for a Ph.D. in the hard sciences. Secondly, why are our doctors treated like rockstars? Only North America requires physicians to have a Doctorate degree, and only North American have such outrageous education costs. Other countries start their medical training at 17 when students graduate Secondary School, and most publically sponsor medical education as a public good. Subsequently, their medical graduates don’t require such inflated payment just to pay off loans, nor are valuable potential engineers veered into medicine because of the pay & prestige. The NHS, Great Britain's socialized medicine, and most of the rest of the World, teach promising high school students to be doctors, guarantee them residency & pay them about $150K/year plus bonuses & specialty premiums. The so-called shortage of doctors is also manufactured. Other "professional" licenses are odious but nothing compares to medicine for bureaucratic grandstanding & sanctimonious gate-keeping: the AMA lobby specializes in preventing more physicians from entering the field. A further artificial limitation is the number of residencies, which is part of the Medicare appropriation from congress and hasn't changed since 1998. Over 16,000 graduated doctors were left unmatched to a residency this year, and without a residency they cannot license, and without a license they can only become cabdrivers. It will take at least a generation to reset expectations & rechannel America's love-affair with doctors to something more appropriate with reality. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_164_doctors.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_164_doctors.mp3 3:49 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash doctors, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 02 Dec 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Medicine is not a science. Medicine has components of science, and the people involved are smugly certain what they know is proven, but in fact, at least half of what they call “evidence-based medicine” is bunk, and almost all of the purveyors of alternative medicine are little more than witch-doctors & shaman. Your personal doctor is little better, he, and more often now, she, is guessing. They're prescribing drugs that don't do anything, and they're diagnosing based on intuition. Most of the remedies rely more on placebo effect than efficaciousness. Unless you're going to the hospital for a broken arm or to get your gall-bladder removed, most of what goes on there is voodoo. The U.S. trails every other advanced nation in medical outcome, yet it spends by far the most as % of GNP. Some people get great service, have their every whim catered to, but as a nation, our healthcare is hit-or-miss. Hospitals are little fiefdoms run by doctors for doctors, where the inefficiency is astounding, Nurses Unions are a nightmare, and everything is expensive for no good reason. They are chrome & glass palaces, more akin to monuments than functional buildings: nothing is standardized & there is resistance to automation. Computers could replace diagnosticians which may be why doctors are now trained as much in “empathy” as they are anatomy. Empathy is the reversing of control to the patient, with the doctor assuming a role similar to a masseuse at the spa: from respected patriarchy to service-provider. Medicine has entered the realm of popular culture with all the sensationalism, vapid argument & petty jealousies that entails. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_163_medicine.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-10_163_medicine.mp3 2:49 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash medicine, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 30 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The stricture against prostitution originated in religion but now its continuance is more momentum & conservatism. There seems to be no rational reason to restrict prosetituion other than the obvious government regulation that any personal service business would enjoy. The condemnation seems to be a subtle manifestation of female jealousy, in the same realm as infidelity except many customers of prostitution have no relationship entanglements? In polling, half the population is for legalizing prostitution. If it had a constituency like Gay Marriage, legalizing prostitution would be a no-brainer, but whereas Gays have successful representatives in business, politics, and most importantly, the media; prostitutes are depicted as victims & hapless, degraded losers. Plus, the feminist movement, rather than applauding the empowerment of women, instead blames men for their primal biological imperative. With all the propaganda decrying prostitution & trumpeting its evils, it's easily disproved by the simple fact that prostitution is legal in Amsterdam, not to mention Nevada. The fact that the same acts not involving money is not illegal seems to escape the logic of restrictionists, and ignoring the prevalence of internet porn, almost 40% of all broadband traffic, and baldly advertised “escort services” in every local newspaper also appears to be voluntary-ignorance & inexplicable. Certainly prostitution is something that should be immediately legalized because any prohibition that turns 10s of millions of people into criminals is a bad idea, with all the usual consequences of selective enforcement, exploitation & true criminal activity. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-08_162_prostitution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-08_162_prostitution.mp3 2:41 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash prostitution, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 28 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The simplest of all societal axioms is: for rules to work, people have to want to obey them. There is no better example of this fundamental concept than the failure of prohibition in the gangster-ridden 1930s, and now, the so-called “War on Drugs,” in all its abysmal failure, worse than a failure, it is a stake in the heart of our whole judicial system. 20 million Americans used illegal drugs last month, and that doesn't include marijuana. Approximately a quarter of the penal system in the United States is clogged with drug offenders. Drug prohibition incites violence here, and especially abroad, because America essentially exports its prohibition violence to Mexico & other poor nations. Let’s face it, our country’s self-righteous attitude towards victimless crimes is unconscionable. If someone wants to risk ruining their life and going to prison for the feeling of euphoria and escape that comes from using drugs then nothing short of execution is going to “cure” the problem. Who are the drug laws for anyway, the people who use them or the people who don’t? Telling 10s of millions of people that they all belong in jail should make you ill, and the fact that someone thinks these symptoms, plus all the criminality that goes along with illegal distribution, are acceptable, is appalling. Frankly, self-righteous moralizers are more abhorrent than the junkies. Ignoring or intentionally violating an irrational law breeds contempt for all laws, and enforcing unjust laws adds suspicion that all enforcement is unjust. Simply stated, the drug laws in this country are eroding civility, not protecting it. The solution is simple: make drugs legal but regulated: people who want the recreational attributes of drugs can be assured of quality, safety, and price, which will monopolize 99% of the market. This is a case where a monopoly works towards the good of society. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-08_161_illegal_drugs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-08_161_illegal_drugs.mp3 3:24 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash illegal drugs, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 26 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy In topsy-turvy, status-conscious America, a degree in B-B stacking from Yale has more cachet than an Engineering degree from Podunk University, and people are often hired simply because they are Ivy League graduates. This is discrimination at its most insidious, and a prime reason why higher education is failing America. It's also the major indication of America's de facto Class system: the elite prestige schools are reserved for the Nouveau Aristocracy with just a smidgen of integration of the lower classes for cover. Lavish campuses, high tuition, and huge undergraduate debt loads have become the norm, and the competition for affluent, high-scoring students causes even second-tier schools to seek higher prestige by aping the same superficial characteristics. They spend on the things that the ranking magazine “U.S. News” measures, and pay for them via student loans which the school rankings don’t care about. But after all that, education has actually become less effective, with fewer and fewer courses taught by tenured professors, and increasing class sizes, all due to an artificial shortage of an imaginary commodity whose only value is a market distorted by prestige-seekers. America is not alone in this, other countries are also obsessed with prestige: British students dream about getting into Oxford or Cambridge; for French students, it's the grandes écoles; South Koreans compete for the Seoul National, or Yonsei; and Japanese hope to get into Todai or Keio. Only the German higher education system seems immune to this totally destructive concept of elitism. They have no exclusive group of universities that will break your career if you cannot get in, and all that's required to attend any university is earning good grades in Secondary school. Subsequently, Germany has a more affordable education system: almost all German universities are public, with students paying only $300 per semester. And German university graduates are considered some of the best in the world. American parents & students are focusing on the wrong thing. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-08_160_prestige_universities.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-08_160_prestige_universities.mp3 3:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash education, universities, prestige, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 24 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The liberal arts are: literature, history, philosophy & the sciences. In classical antiquity these subjects were “worthy of a free person,” the Latin word liberalis. Liberals participated in public debate, on juries, and military service, as well as art, music & astronomy. America inherited this Old World education tradition and has been mostly successful when focusing on a liberal arts ciricullum for its Primary & Secondary schooling, but we seem to have overplayed that commitment in our colleges, which are churning out more-n-more Liberal Arts graduates prepared for nothing more than waiting tables or selling insurance. More Americans receive a Liberal Arts education now than ever before, with an average growth rate nearing 5% annually. The total number of Liberal Arts degrees awarded a year grew from 100,000 to 350,000 in 25 years, nearly 40% of all associate degrees, but during the same time, the share of professional degrees fell 10%. A liberal education certainly prepares our youth for life but it is only a springboard to more technical & challenging pursuits required by our modern society. We need engineers & scientists, managers & technitions, all building on the foundation of a Liberal Arts education, not pre-empted by one. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-08_159_liberal_arts_education.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-08_159_liberal_arts_education.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberal arts, education, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 22 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Married couples have special inheritance, medical, retirement, and childcare benefits & responsibilities. The law considers the married partner as having a vested interest in the well-being of the other partner, and there are volumes of case law defining & protecting that arrangement. So, from a legal point-of-view, “gay marriage” actually strengthens the concept of marriage, overwhelming any societal past-predilections against it. As a society, our definition of “marriage” is evolving, and we are using democracy to determine it as a subjective issue rather than a scientific or legal one. And the Supreme Court has thrown its considerable weight behind gay marriage too. It is not disrespectful to say that what is important to your concept of marriage is not necessarily mine. In a question of liberty, we are all allowed to believe what we want as long as it does not affect other people’s liberty. Gay marriage may make you uncomfortable but that is not reason enough to dictate the personal lives of others. Marriage has moved beyond tradition, and religious objections to same-sex marriage are subsumed by Rule of Law. It seems likely that future generations will look back on the Gay Marriage controversy in America as a kind of primitiveness, similar to how we look back on slavery. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-07_158_gay_marriage.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-07_158_gay_marriage.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash gay marriage, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 20 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Let's review an eclectic range of original concepts & new ideas, new to you anyway: 1. Constitutional plain language requires people to be mind-readers of dead folks. 2. Patents are justified rent-seeking but Copyright is hero worship. 3. Bankruptcy is how individuals escape indentured servitude but it is slipping away. 4. Balanced Budget Amendment requires taxes to be raised automatically to fully cover government expenditures. 5. A Debit Economy disallows government borrowing. 6. The Sharing Economy breaks the power of the rent-seekers & gate-keepers. 7. Freedom of Religion inspired & maintains America's reverence for liberty. 8. Morals & values are someone else's method of controlling you. 9. Atheism has become its own religion. 10. The real debate is where evolution crosses from science into speculation. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-07_157_new_concepts_vol_14.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-07_157_new_concepts_vol_14.mp3 2:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 18 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Do you want to be the center of attention at a dinner party? Simply say you don’t believe in evolution: nothing gets the modern elite indignant faster than rejection of their group geist. Be careful though because no amount of backpedaling or explanation on your part will ever remove the taint of suspicion about your intelligence. In the future, whenever you see people whispering, it’s about you. Evolution is science but people are turning it into a religion. If you should choose shunning over bad science, you can still be an atheist because though the evolutionists won’t admit it, there are possibilities of where you came from other than divine intervention, and all have some modicum of respectability: time travel, alien visitors, reincarnation, learned inheritance, DNA on an asteroid, or you’re simply all a figment of my imagination. While I certainly agree that we should teach only science in schools, there are still giant holes in the theory of evolution. Specifically, the calculations seem inadequate: for example, evolutionist theory says there have been 300,000 generations from that first inkling of "homo" to homo sapiens. There must have been myriad changes per generation, however there have been no changes to humans in 300 generations, as evidenced by genetic studies of 5,000 year old corpses, so making that the step size leaves only 1,000 iterations to get from protomen to us? And why is there only one homo species after expected billions of permutations? Not to mention the whole irreducible complexity aspect of the problem. Obviously there are some essential questions to be answered for evolution to be more than a curious, alluring theory. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-07_156_evolution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-07_156_evolution.mp3 2:48 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash evolution, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Though there are religionists who try and deny it, Freedom of Religion includes freedom from religion. Some people try to associate that Right with atheism but in recent times, atheism has become its own religion: they proselytize, they have believe-it-or-else evolutionist dogma, and they simply rely on faith that there is no god. And the Atheists who vehemently deny Atheism is a religion act just like religious zealots: rushing in to espouse their religion to anyone within earshot, claiming only they know the truth & they are transcendent with a smug certainty that everyone else is misinformed or stupid, so how can anyone tell the difference? Something that you cannot discern from a religion is as good as one. I'd be an Atheist but I find evolution equally improbable, and though I'm not an Atheist, I applaud their tactics of forcing people to examine the irony & hypocrisy of deeply indoctrinated preconceptions by putting up statues of Satan next to statues of Jesus, and having a booth at the Christmas bazaar. Hopefully, that's all tongue-in-cheek, otherwise I'd rather take the invisible-man-in-the-sky explanation any day. Unfortunately, there's no debating Atheists, like there's no debating Creationists; everyone's an expert and there's no give. The interesting thing is that a Creationist will simply smile as you walk away, but you have to physically wrestle down an Atheist and break their middle-finger to escape. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-07_155_atheism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-07_155_atheism.mp3 2:23 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash atheism, religion, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 14 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy There are few things in political debate as abused and fraught with hypocrisy as the citation of moral values as the reason to do something. Not only does self-righteous indignation germinate from the feeling of grandiose moral superiority, both detestable qualities, but nothing is more subjective. We did not grow up in the same neighborhoods, attend the same churches, nor even go to schools that uniformly espoused a consistent set of morals. If you believe you have been wronged, or someone else needs protection from whatever degradation, injustice, attack, or deprivation, seek recompense in the law, that is what it is there for. An entire constitutionally provided for and universally applied judicial system has been constructed to determine what is “moral” so you don’t have to. Other than the Rights guaranteed in the Constitution, and those that derive from it, you have no further responsibilities placed on you unless you have explicitly accepted an obligation. That means you have no legal responsibility to feed the hungry, nor shelter the homeless, nor provide jobs to the populace. As a society, we may choose to provide some minimum of these things, but you, as an individual, have no such obligation. If others declare self-righteously that you indeed do owe these things, and attempt to use shame & ridicule to force you into providing them, those people are trying to impose their will on you, they are attempting to control you their own interpretation of morals & values. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-06_154_morals__values.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-06_154_morals__values.mp3 2:33 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash morals, values, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 12 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy It's fair to say America was founded on religion. Early settlers didn't come here for opportunity so much as to escape oppression, often religious oppression. The liberty they were lusting after was the liberty to believe crazy stuff without being persecuted by those who thought everyone should believe some other crazy stuff. It's also fair to say that this was the seed from which America's liberty focus grew whereas it wilted & died in the rest of the world. Tolerance of different religions makes Americans less judgmental but it also makes them more accepting of mysticism in place of science, sham medicine being the worst. Quackery, cults & prophets are commonly on display in America, and the disdain for critical thinking bleeds into our political discourse. Liberty is indeed a unique gift but the catalyst that brought it to us tends to also hold us back. To the rest of the World America appears immature & barbaric, probably because religion comes from those Medieval times. If society in Europe is any guide to the future then the waves of religion will eventually dissipate against the shores of logic. We might even be seeing this now in the Millennial generation: more modernity in their thinking, less adherence to dogma & taboo. In reality, there is little downside to having a religious nation: the morals & values of religion effectively hold back the libertarian tide until a new social consciousness can emerge. A nation of laws we may be but the unenforced tenants of religion make us the honest & sincere people that we are. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-06_153_religion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-06_153_religion.mp3 2:25 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash religion, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 10 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Every competent person has some under-utilized talent or capacity locked away, unable to perform due to society's impossibly rigged game. The so-called, “Sharing Economy,” gives those people an opportunity to capitalize on their resources, which is why it is anathema to rent-seekers, gate-keepers & restrictive unionists of all kinds who use artificial scarcity & extortion to overvalue their own skills by locking other people out. The Sharing Economy is made possible through smart-phone Apps like Uber that turn anyone with a car & good driving record into a ride service, or Yerdle for second-hand goods, ParkAtMyHouse, Vayable to be a local tour guide, DogVacay for pet-setting, Spinlister for renting your unused sport gear, LeftoverSwap for unused food, HomeDine to invite dining guests to your house, GetAround lets someone rent your car, Zaarly to be a handyman, Lending Club to loan money, Fon to rent your WiFi, Poshmark to sell your used clothing, Postmates to be a local courier & Instacart to deliver someone's groceries. But even if you make some money through your own effort & resources, you're definitely not an employee & probably don't want to be one, you just need enough money to engage in your Millennial lifestyle of room-sharing, video-gaming, outdooring & bar-hopping. Unfortunately, your meager effort to make a little dough is totally undermined by our corrupt tax system, especially with the increasing income & wealth inequality, and embattled Middle Class. Right now, if you make $2000/month income for your participation in the Sharing Economy, over 15% of the very first dollar you earn is taken for Social Security & Medicare. Add to that your normal “poor” person base tax-rate of 10% & you're paying over $5000/year in taxes, primarily to support people better off than you are. So the Sharing Economy gives you a chance to work but you're also going to need to vote to keep others from taking it from you. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-06_152_the_sharing_economy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-06_152_the_sharing_economy.mp3 3:16 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash sharing economy, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 08 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy The U.S. has had an ever increasing National Debt for most of its recent history, to the point of no return, and there’s no reason to think politics can ever be fiscally responsible. Debit cards have become the solution for private people who have a tendency to go into debt and not be able to pay it back, so let's extend that idea into the public sphere. Cut up the credit card: America needs to become a Debit Economy. A Debit Economy is not intended to decrease Government spending: we only need consider our standard-of-living, our science, our sophistication, and our ever accelerating level of comfort, to prove that Government spending is a good thing. A Debit Economy would force fiscal responsibility while still advancing a civil society, and consists of three parts: first, a Spend-n-Tax paradigm where the money Government spends is fully returned by the people who ended up with it. Secondly, a Balanced Budget Amendment to disallow Government borrowing. And thirdly, privatizing government services to discourage bureaucracy & encourage innovation. How much Government spends is the debate between Liberals and Conservatives, but regardless of the ideology, in a Debit Economy, the battle between the Politics-of-Envy and the Politics-of-Greed would be out in the open for all to see and confront. We would stop planting a timebomb of future debt, and halt the building resentment between those who are employed by government & those who have to pay for them. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-06_151_debit_economy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-06_151_debit_economy.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash economy, debit, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 06 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0800 Politics & Philosophy Article I, Section 8, Clause 2 of the Constitution grants to the U.S. Congress the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States. In 1798, a decade after adoption of the Constitution, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment taking from the Federal Government the power of borrowing.” A Balanced Budget Amendment is a constitutional rule requiring that the nation cannot spend more than its income. It requires a balance between the projected receipts and expenditures of the government. Other countries, like Germany, Hong Kong, and the Swiss have balanced budget requirements in their Constitutions. In 1985 & 1987 U.S. legislation attempted to curb government borrowing, and in 1983, an effort to add a Balanced Budget Amendment passed in 32 of the 34 States required to trigger a Constitutional Convention. All failed. The fact is, having a federal debt has substantially helped everyday Americans because the yearly Budget Deficits are mostly to cover social programs, so the problem isn't spending on things that The People want, the problem is paying for it. Understandably, human nature is such that people don't like paying taxes and the people who would pay the most, The Rich, have tremendous amounts of money fighting against taxes, so it seems unlikely a Balanced Budget Amendment will occur, but even if it does, the solution is not to cap spending, or even borrowing, the solution is much more fundamental & simple than that. Firstly, the focus must be on revenue: Government must raise taxes to equal The People-approved spending. Secondly, Government cannot accrue future financial obligations, which means no pensions, no bonds, and no “trust” funds. That's it, that's the Balanced Budget Amendment. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-05_150_balanced_budget_amendment.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-05_150_balanced_budget_amendment.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash balanced budget amendment, constitution, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 04 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Alleviating unsustainable debts that trap people for life was so important to the writers of the U.S. Constitution that they included bankruptcy as a basic right, part of the core guarantees. Why? Because people that are forced into debt service, or worse, Debtors Prisons, are little more than slaves, which makes it creepily ironic that slavery itself was not also abolished in the original Constitution. It's also ironic that the only debts Americans can't bankrupt out of are School Loans, Taxes & Child Support, meaning kids, education & government are the only financial obligations that are considered important enough to destroy your life. Bankruptcies are recognized as essential because they provide a formal mechanism for readjustment of circumstances. Bankruptcy is there because it works. Whenever bankruptcy is circumvented through government bailouts, social strictures or pandering to Special Interests, that's when long-term problems occur. Of course bankruptcy is exploited by the unscrupulous, same as any fundamental Right can be leveraged into something unintended by those who enumerated our Rights, but rather than penalizing the many for the actions of a tainted few, we must simply account for them: businesses that loan money certainly do. Ending on yet another irony, Debtor Prison does indeed exist in America even though bankruptcy was intended to eliminate it. For example, men behind in child support make-up 1/8th of the inmate population in South Carolina, 7 million students have defaulted on loans so cannot move on with their lives & the I.R.S. imprisons 4 out of 5 people convicted, costing more than $200 million a year. Where's bankruptcy when you need it? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-05_149_bankruptcy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-05_149_bankruptcy.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash bankruptcy, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 02 Nov 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Thomas Jefferson himself was the main proponent of the whole idea of patents, even becoming head of the first U.S. Patent Office. He fancied himself an inventor, which were the Rock Stars of the age, and of course everybody wants to be a Rock Star. The trade off is: you explain in detail how do something technical, and for a limited time government will give you exclusive right to the rewards of that design. Patents require extreme scrutiny, disclosure, and involve something new & unique. Works pretty good: intellectual pursuits are encouraged & the nation benefits with progress. However, nothing exemplifies how government's regulatory capacity has been captured like copyright. Us humans are entertained by performance & the exhibition of unique skills, and we become enamored to people who seem to create currents of notoriety around themselves. People in Congress are just as susceptible to being starstruck, probably more so since fame attracts them to become candidates in the first place. There is no reason Mickey Mouse should still be under copyright, trademark covers him, and there is certainly no reason for copyright to be longer than patents, over 120 years, applies to any mundane thing, and is totally subjective, plus the penalties for violating a copyright are draconian. If a rapper samples five notes off of a '70s Pop song, he owes royalties on the copyright, but the guy who designed broadcast TV gets diddlysquat from his patent now. And copyright has put an absolute blanket on the Internet, causing untold noise, confusion & expense to prevent something that obviously benefits society. Time for copyright to go, and for patents to be reexamined too, so that pharmaceutical companies can't monopolize life-saving drugs. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-05_148_patents__copyright.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-05_148_patents__copyright.mp3 2:56 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash patents, copyright, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 31 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Being an interpreter has a power all its own: whatever you say goes. It's one of the oldest methods of control: priests would talk to God, shamans would predict the future from mouse bones, even anthropologists today can tell you how humans supposedly lived 25,000 years ago. To gain interpreter control, people try to insinuate themselves between you & the source of information: of course, with the irrefutably of the U.S. Constitution, it is a prime target, and erstwhile interpreters insist only they know what it really means, that they have a special kind of deductive power that lets them know what the original intent for every word written was meant to be. James Madison, author of the Constitution, was 36 years old when he wrote it. Does this not give the interpreters pause? The fallibility of any man is a forgone conclusion, and only time & absence can add the kind of majesty required to turn them into gods. However much I admire James Madison, The Constitution, or America; modern wisdom & judgment are the only restrictions that apply now. “Plain language,” “textualism,” “original intent,” all evoke interpreters but no interpreter can really tell us what some young dead guy was thinking 250 years ago, even if it was 100% correct. The Constitution is obviously not absolute, see Prohibition, not to mention the Three-fifths clause which bursts any misconceptions that the Constitution is a holy document as believed by Mormons. Canada got it right, their Constitution follows the "living tree doctrine” that says that a constitution is organic and must be read in a broad and progressive manner so as to adapt it to the changing times. In the U.S. we call this concept loose constructionism, or “Living Constitution,” but a conservative justice gives plain language precedence while a liberal judge goes with constructionism, so depending on the mix of The Court, different opinions can be reached from the same sentence. Obviously, since Supreme Court justices are appointed by the president, and have a lifetime tenure, the Constitution is as much a political document as a legal one, and reflects the political schisms in this country as much as any campaigning gladhander. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-05_147_constitutional_plain_language.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-05_147_constitutional_plain_language.mp3 3:38 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash constitution, plain language, living constitution, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 29 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy This last group of episodes was an original & unique examination of pure politics: 1. The crowning achievement of internecine politics is to prevent revolution. 2. The young are not the servants of the old. 3. Everyone avails themselves of social programs at sometime during their life. 4. Republicans attract people with old-fashioned conceptions of society. 5. Democrats attract people who would benefit from a disruption of the status quo. 6. Libertarianism is a small slice view of a very large pie. 7. Liberals are moderate libertarians & Progressives are moderate socialists. 8. Third Parties are nothing but spoilers. 9. Party Loyalty is a sign of foolishness. 10. An oral illusion is the practice of tricking the listener into a misapplication of logic. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-04_146_new_concepts_vol_13.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-04_146_new_concepts_vol_13.mp3 2:05 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 27 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Words are symbolic metaphors that convey a tremendous amount of information. Because a word evokes existing preconceptions, clever manipulation of the word, coupled with intentional misleading, is an “oral illusion.” Politics is the expert practice of oral illusions because politicians recognize that they can plumb the wellspring of deep-seated human emotions by distorting the meaning of words. For example, “compassion” is one of those oral illusions: everyone assumes compassion is admirable, from wanting to help stranded puppies to comforting a friend’s bereavement, but in politics, the word “compassion” is used as cover for envy. It is manipulated and propagandized. The Left is often guilty of oral illusions, as evidences by political linguists, like Noam Chomsky & George Lakoff, whose whole careers centered around the power of words, often providing cover for an irrational & dishonest Equalist ideology. When logic is defeating them, they inject the discussion with confusion by assigning new definitions to words, and using circular logic. Their expertise makes them almost impossible to defeat in live debate, but close examination of their written words exposes the deception. The solution is to simplify all issues down to yes-or-no answers, like we do here in these discussions, then when an oral illusionist appears, you cannot be fooled. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-04_145_oral_illusion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-04_145_oral_illusion.mp3 2:37 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash oral illusion, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 25 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Democracy is more a sport than a method of rational governance. In fact, people have much more loyalty to a Party than they do to the ideology of the Party, and perversity & spite play a bigger role in politics than either logic or merit, or even self-interest. “Voting the ticket” is Party-speak for this kind of selfish hackery where an otherwise reasonable person will vote for a dog before they will vote for a competent, qualified, and effective candidate from the opposition because the penalty for not following the herd is shunning, and shrill, self-righteous accusations of disloyalty from the Party faithful. This exhibition of mindless devotion is more mystical than rational. A close examination of the people who actually exhibit this behavior is alarming: many Party loyalists find little power in their own lives and so they substitute the collective power of others who are similarly ignored & discounted in real life. All the weaklings, tired of a lifetime of bullying, join together to impose their foolish wills on others by leveraging the power of exploiting the weaknesses of democracy, where small numbers of voters can control the agenda for the large numbers of non-voters. Of course, this description doesn't account for everyone, and if you are part of the wise few who actually treat politics in a rational & logical manner, then when there is no discernible quality difference between competing candidates, support your Party, but when a clearly high-caliber candidate from any Party appears, voting for that person should transcend petty loyalties. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-04_144_party_loyalty.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-04_144_party_loyalty.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash party loyalty, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 23 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Teddy Roosevelt proved that the most popular man in the world can't win as a Third Party. There are endless papers on Third Parties: without proportional representation, like a parliament that most modern day democracy's have, Third parties are simply spoilers. Think about it for a minute: you don't want to vote for one of the Majors because you disagree with some part of their platform, so that Party loses your vote and the other Party wins: now, rather than getting some platform agreement, you get none, a case study in irrationality. Al Gore would have won except for the people who voted for Ralph Nader. Bush Sr. would have been president but for Ross Perot. And even if by some miracle a Third Party candidate wins at the national level, they have no bench. Unless some billionaires want to finance a slate of thousands of good candidates throughout the country to support the leadership, no Third Party is on the horizon. The U.S. is not a parliamentary system, we don't have dozens of ideologies represented in our decision-making. Instead our ideological battles occurred during the Primaries when minority thinking was filtered out. That makes votes in the legislature a homogeneous choice between two distinct ideologies, usually giving one Party a free hand to move the country in their direction, good or bad depending on your pov. So far, it's worked: America is the only superpower because of its cultural & economic dominance, much of that due to our political system which reflects a focus on liberty with its stark yes-or-no choices. There are no third options. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-04_143_third_parties.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-04_143_third_parties.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash third party, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 21 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberals are moderate libertarians & Progressives are moderate socialists; overlapping but coming from different directions, and because they sound the same on many issues, most people are unsure of the difference, but Liberals, as in “liberty,” put the individual before the group, personal accountability, rewards commensurate with effort, while Progressives place the group before the individual, often citing the “common good.” This, of course, has a paternalistic flavor of the we-know-better-n-you kind but, frankly, they do know-better-n-half the population, the incompetent half. Sometimes telling the difference between Liberals & Progressives is quite difficult because many people don't even know themselves: they call themselves “Progressives” because they don't like the connotations that the word “liberal” brings: you can thank Republicans for that. The Democratic Party, at least in its platform, is not progressive nor socialist, but because we are a 2-Party system, there is no place else for Progressives to go. But it's an insidious, oil-and-water combination because socialism has the inherit problem of conflicting with the U.S. Constitution. As our society matures, it certainly accepts more and bigger socialistic manifestations. It's possible that eventually the individualism underpinnings of American society will be replaced by collectivism via fiat, because life, liberty & pursuit of happiness are relative. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_142_liberals_v_progressives.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_142_liberals_v_progressives.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash liberals, progressives, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 19 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Libertarians are diametrically opposite of socialists: they are only concerned with individual liberty. Period. They advocate a minimalist enlightened government, maybe even a philosopher king, that takes care of life's drudgery so that they can exercise their ambitions without halter nor fetter: run free wild spirit, achieve your maximum potential. Frankly, if it would work, I’d love to live a Libertarian’s dream: only concerned about what I want, living without obligations or dependencies, it's an Utopian ideal for competent people. Libertarians don't recognize that society's primary goal is to perpetuate itself: this changes the dynamic because without concern for posterity, Libertarins have no need for constraints on liberty. The question is no longer a choice between individual wants & society needs, it's only what the individual wants. They couch this concept in words like meritocracy & rewards, and ignore the parts others in society played in their success & in their opportunity for success. Libertarians are under the misconception that their outcome in life was due to their own efforts, not as a lucky combination of events: just because you didn't see the trashman doesn't mean you picked up the garbage yourself. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_141_libertarians.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_141_libertarians.mp3 2:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash libertarians, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 17 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Republicans are just a Party, and there are only two Parties that count so a host of ideologies find themselves under the same umbrella: old-fashioned GOP stalwarts, Tea Partiers & Libertarians. Their only common trait is a belief that you are responsible for yourself & nobody else is responsible for you. There's also varying degrees of “great man” admiration & a fundamental economics misunderstand that compares a nation's finances to how they spend money in their own homes. Only 29% of America voters identify as Republican but so-called “Undecideds” lean Republican. Most people are the Party of their parents, which is to be expected considering the indoctrination & conditioning children are subject to. The Party creates the person as much as the religion the child was born into. In fact, Republicans have a component called the “Religious Right” that heavily influences the Republican Platform, but religion doesn't determine Republicanism, and neither does the other oft-quoted identify factor, conservativism. Since Parties are nothing more than teams, looking at who is attracted by the team would be the best way of describing Republicans. So compared to the rest of America, what traits & tactics distinguish modern Republicans? Reverance towards authority, courtesy, morals-values conscious, punishment oriented, conservative, religious, military idealization, older, better informed, mature & rural. Their tactics are organized, friendly, sincere & naive. And Republicans have a cynical view of democracy. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_139_republicans.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_139_republicans.mp3 2:41 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash republicans, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 13 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy What do people think of when you say “social programs”? Welfare? Social Security & Medicare? Child Care? Maternity Leave? Caring for those that cannot care for themselves? These are services that private charities did in the past but we are an evolving, mutable society, and placing the burden for our well-being on other individuals violates their liberty as well as our own. The charities that provided clearly essential services were haphazardly funded, inadequately staffed & at the mercy of circumstance. In modern times, those functions need to come under the jurisdiction of government to provide consistency, management & longevity. Combining the State's duty to propagate itself with its duty to take care of you when you are ill, social programs assume some of the responsible for raising the next generation, as well as nursing the last. We can Depend on Market Forces to drive most of the economy: the competent top quarter of the population will keep the plates spinning & our smart-phones improving, but the majority of Americans need the benefits that society-sponsored social programs can provide, and these needs wax & wane while people are getting started, during their child-rearing years & post-retirement. Even the go-getter, make-things-happen part of your life is limited to perhaps three decades. Social programs are the foundation upon which everyone stands to provide a pyramid of shoulders so the ones at the top can reach for the stars. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_138_social_programs.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_138_social_programs.mp3 2:26 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash social programs, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 11 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Democracy is the biggest danger to liberty. As soon as a large enough constituency develops, it votes in its own self-interest, and if combined with no associated responsibility, the exploitation is especially heinous. A pernicious myth in America, in most of the Western World actually, is that a significant portion of the population can be totally consumptive without stalling the gravy-train. As America's retired population approaches critical mass, the reality of the situation will become clear over the next few decades. No, in fact, the young are not beholden to the old, and will not allow themselves to be callously enslaved at the ballot box forever. My aged father literally says that he only cares about what he gets because he's going die soon & it will be the kid's problem. Even those elders who claim to have saved for their own retirement and are not at government's teat, the fact is life is a lucktocracy, and only the vagaries of history allowed them to be able to accumulate an imaginary nest-egg. It's a hubris built on incomprehension of their true place in society, one of parasitism. Age also provides immunity against the Political Correctness juggernaut. In fact, censor will be aimed at me for stating these obvious facts, such is the irrational, topsy-turvy world we live in where the weak gain control via the innocent mechanisms of liberty. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_137_retirees.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_137_retirees.mp3 2:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash retirees, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 09 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy I was often accused of being naive about politics and I plead guilty. I simply believed the specious descriptions of the American experience I was taught in grade school, secondary school, college, church, civic holidays, media, peers, and all the other venues where the mythology of political idealism is propagated. The political system, it was implied, can be dirty but everyone has America’s best interest at heart. Well, I have now been in the political maelstrom long enough to re-calibrate: politics is a spoils system, nothing more. It is surrounded with pretensions, enveloped by ideology, and shrouded in patriotism, but the reality is infinitely baser: politics is vanity mixed with selfish profiteering. Historically, politics in the U.S. was unabashedly corrupt, each Party vying for control to exploit the system. Over time, however, reformers have forced corruption into the shadows, such that only glimpses of the underbelly hit our newsfeeds. Ironically, a Party's triumph is its own downfall. When a group prevails, it carves up and distributes the rewards to its self-interested constituents. Soon afterwards the veil is lifted and public envy & resentment causes the tide to turn to the other Party, so that power is never quite consolidated. In fact, it seems the actual achievement of politics is not to provide efficient and honest government, but to prevent armed revolution. That alone is worth the trouble. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_136_politics.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_136_politics.mp3 2:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 07 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy That last batch was the closest grouping of controversial concepts we've had so far but with an original take: 1. The Constitution puts liberty first, making the United States the only liberty nation. 2. The success of America's Free Market is primarily a result of carefully crafted regulations. 3. New Rights reverse responsibility. 4. Mandatory voting is in direct violation of liberty, the responsibility to make your own decisions. 5. Free Speech is under attack from the cynically offended trying to wrest control for themselves. 6. Freedom of Movement is under pressure from rent-seekers & urban planners. 7. Right to Privacy is a modern contrivance to which the State now only pays lip-service. 8. Protection from search & seizure has been almost completely lost. 9. Abortion is a battle between those-who-know-better-than-you & women. 10. There is no more personal right than the Right to Die. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_135_new_concepts_vol_12.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_135_new_concepts_vol_12.mp3 2:27 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 05 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The ultimate in liberty is choosing whether to end your own life. There are all manner of dogmatic reasons that other people use who would like to take this liberty from you: religion, paternalism & selfishness, but that does not assuage the theft of your choice. A handful of States now allow physician-assisted suicide, called “death with dignity,” and several countries have been successfully practicing it for over a decade. Physician-assisted suicide is always at the request and with the consent of the patient, since he or she self-administers the means of death. There's a lot of oversight & built-in protections so the number is only in the 100s per year where it's available but it's gaining acceptance. The safeguards against illogical or irrational suicide are many-fold: the patient must have a psychiatric evaluation, personal physician & attorney, but you're never going to really prevent a committed person from taking their own life, as evidenced by over 40,000 suicides each year, and almost half a million attempted suicides, at a cost of approximately $45 billion. It's not really what you think about grandma's choice, it's about her & she'll make her own decisions. And if Uncle Roy chooses to check-out for whatever reason, you're not going to stop him by putting the people who helped him in prison. The Right to Die is the most personal Right of all, and only religious conservatism keeps everyone from having it. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_134_right_to_die.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_134_right_to_die.mp3 2:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash right to die, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 03 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Our society assigns relative values to life, liberty & property, and it uses democracy & The Courts to do it, but there are folks who think their value system supersedes the liberty of others. Specifically I'm referring to the unquenchable hysteria surrounding abortion. Since 2% of women of child-bearing age have abortions every year, it's certainly of immense importance, but the wisdom of letting the people bearing the burden of pregnancy make the decision is lost on the zealots. Our judicial system has said that life begins with breath: this is a somewhat subjective call but it's the best we can do in a liberty society. Unfortunately, indoctrination is almost impossible to break, especially religious dogma. Logic & rationality are easily defeated by faith, and no amount of argument or evidence can change a closed mind. If you can get people to die for an invisible man in the sky, then when there's actual evidence of life, like a fetus, the rhetoric gets very heated indeed. Emancipation used similar arguments & reasoning, and when viewed in that context, the anti-abortion folks have a point, which is what makes the conflict so vicious, because the sides are equally matched. The line between where one person's liberty ends, and another's begins can be very fine, and simply looking at it from a different angle may make it shift a little, just enough to push it onto the other side. Abortion may be the closest example of an issue like that: add a wee bit of religion, and it seems wrong, but take away the sanctimony, and clearly it's no harder choice to make than letting a million poor children die in Africa when all you had to do was send them malaria medicine. The answer is always the same in a liberty society, when in doubt, give the choice to the responsible individual. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_133_abortion.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_133_abortion.mp3 3:11 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash abortion, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 01 Oct 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The 4th Amendment of the Constitution states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” Thomas Paine said a patriot was “a citizen who protects his country from his government." Americans do not trust government to be benevolent nor should they. This was the reason the Constitution was written in the first place but it doesn't seem to be working in the case of the 4th Amendment: how can confiscation of your property by government, where your property has to prove it is innocent, not be a violation against seizure. And when a shadowy government organization, the NSA, peruses everything on you computer, is that not a search? This is an example of how not fervently defending a Right allows it to atrophy out of existence. More than 300 federal statutes authorize government agencies to issue "administrative subpoenas" unilaterally, bypassing neutral judges & probable cause, letting government agencies obtain private records of individuals & businesses. Police were looking at the personal data & pictures on people's cell phones before The Supreme Court stopped them. Snowden's release of secret documents showed they are making full scans of people's computers, but that will only stop after it too is adjudicated before the Supreme Court, and even then I've lost faith that law enforcement can be trusted to show proper respect for the 4th Amendment. Is there really any protection from Search & Seizure? Why do we let them? Almost 50,000 people die of prescription opiate overdoses a year, but we let terrorist killing of even a handful of people stampede us away from a Right actually enumerated in the Constitution. We are cowards, not deserving of our liberty. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_132_protection_from_search__seizure.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_132_protection_from_search__seizure.mp3 3:19 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash search, seizure, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Right to Privacy is an implied guarantee, not in the Constitution per se. It's one of those derived Rights cobbled together by The Courts from various whimsical passages & obscure references. The reverence people put on privacy is misplaced because it's not about privacy: like all Rights it's a control issue, and privacy is so intimate & personal that it offers lots of opportunity to impose your subjectivity on others because only you can say rather your privacy is violated. Frankly, I don't even know what privacy is because it doesn't get any more intimate than the NSA tracking your porn sites. Truth is, throughout all of human history there has never been any privacy, there simply wasn't the means to enforce it, and the concept was rather alien, otherwise it would have showed up in Common Law. Privacy can only be accommodated in advanced, productive societies where goods & opportunities are so plentiful that we can all own & do everything. Compared to the past, we have unlimited living space & the ability to cloister ourselves away from the rest of the world. Privacy is self-involvement, the ultimate manifestation of the solipsism that only you exist & everyone else is a figment of your imagination. The age of privacy may have only existed for the brief few decades after it was manufactured out of thin air in 1965, up until the Patriot Act in 2001. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_131_right_to_privacy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-02_131_right_to_privacy.mp3 2:44 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash right to privacy, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 28 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Freedom of Movement is not in the Constitution per se, it's a derived guarantee, meaning The Courts made it up. It bars needing “papers” to move, or denying benefits based on location, gives access to public beaches, and pretty much built the freeway system. It was also used to justify the Disability Act, and is always in the back of the minds of erstwhile urban planners as leverage to force everyone into their public transportation fantasies. For half of the population, Freedom of Movement means cars, but for the other half it means mass transit. We can’t have a one-sided, rich-people view of our transportation needs, but and it’s also unclear what amount of transportation people are owed? If the debate was about the concept of free movement rather than specific implementations, like Light Rail, other solutions that involve the private sector seem the most promising, especially utilizing today’s information technology. One particularly venal restriction of Freedom of Movement is tolling, especially tolling of bridge crossings, another is the privatization of roadways. These are egregious examples of how The Rich exploit everyone else: The Rich pay relatively low tolls for fast access on roadways subsidized by all the people packed onto the public lanes, and bridge tolling is primarily a mechanism for city planners to put their populace under the control of bureaucratic elites. Freedom of Movement facilitates Capitalism because it allows the best allocation of underutilized human capital to migrate to burgeoning job centers. This concept clashes with socialists who do not like the responsibility of pursuing their own careers but think society owes them the contentment of staying in one place their whole lives. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-01_130_freedom_of_movement.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-01_130_freedom_of_movement.mp3 2:50 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash freedom of movement, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 26 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There are many examples of people trying to gain control by making an issue about themselves, only the “I'm offended” crowd is the most spectacularly obvious about it. It's a highly effective tactic that immediately coarsens communication because the accused must either go silent, which is of course what the attacker wants, or must fight back, and that takes enormous self-confidence to do, especially in public. The “I'm offended” attack is exploiting other people's courtesy, and relies on our passive natures when in comes to confrontation. Most of us would rather not engage in nor witness a acrimonious verbal exchange so the momentum is all on the side of the attacker. As children we were conditioned to succumb to an “I'm offended” attack by adults who took great sanctimonious pleasure in vocally condemning our use of “dirty” words, and the indoctrination remains strong into adulthood. That's why the offended attack, represented by the college campus euphemism, “Safe Space,” is so attractive to & effective on young people. But Race-Baiters and victims of all kinds are profligate users of offense as cause celeb. Religions are also purveyors of the offended attack, and unfortunately, the bad judgment inherent in religion can actually result in physical violence against the perceived offenders, squelching Free Speech with a Kalashnikov. There are people whose job requires them to run afoul of zealotry, such as the French satirist magazine Charlie Hebdo, that were killed by offended Muslims. Unbelievable as it seems, there are actually “enlightened” Westerners claiming Charlie Hebdo deserved what they got?! Firefighters can never be blamed for dying in fires. I don't admire people who go around bashing religions, setting up conferences to bash religions, or attending religion bashing events, however, I support those people's Rights & ability to do so, whatever the consequences may be. Limiting Free Speech because somebody might be offended, and in response capture some poor Japanese missionary in Syria and behead them is the kind of logic that clearly points to a coward & ingrate not worthy of having liberty. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-01_129_free_speech.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-01_129_free_speech.mp3 3:29 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash free speech, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 24 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Socialist-type thinkers live in a delusion that most people are egalitarian & altruistic, and that a small group of mean & selfish people have co-opted democracy by making the rest of us think voting isn't worth it, so paternalism naturally leads them to think we should be forced to vote for our best interests, because they know what is best for us. Supporting this argument is that authoritarians on the other side actual promote disenfranchisement through onerous voter ID laws, short voting hours, old-technology & the like, because they want to strengthen their elitist advantage. So Mandatory Voting is an attempt to push-back against this weaknesses of democracy. By forcing people to vote, like they do in Australia, Mandatory Voting advocates hope to diminish the power of the small Special Interest groups of people who do vote, such as the elderly, however this is America and we are taught to make our own choices, one one which is to vote or not. 300 million people have been indoctrinated since childhood to think this way, and we have a Constitution that espouses it, so as good as an idea of forced voting might be to blunt the power of an elite aristocracy, it diametrically conflicts with liberty, and should not be adopted. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-31_128_mandatory_voting.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-31_128_mandatory_voting.mp3 2:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash mandatory voting, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 22 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Control is about what other people owe you which is why there is always clamor for some new entitlement or Right. For example, if charity was a Right, you would owe them, it wouldn't be your choice. That's why the battle over Rights is so ferocious: if someone can gain the claim to a new Right, power would have to realign to accommodate the new control. This has happened many times in the past, usually through The Courts. There are already many Rights that are not explicitly enumerated in the U.S. Constitution: Right to Privacy, Freedom of movement, Right to Die, Right to an Abortion, Gay Marriage, even Right to Vote. Without these constructed Rights, America would not be the success it is today, but notice how each each new Right moved control from the group to the individual, which is a good thing if liberty is your ideology. Rights, however, are not entirely carte blanche towards liberty. This is not a libertarian society: you only have rights because other people let you have them, otherwise it would not be democracy. At some point the desires of the majority will be counter to your own self-interest, and you may be forced to pay for a group function, like defense, healthcare, education or social entitlements. If you disagree then you must argue through The Courts to see if your personal desires supersede the desires of everyone else, and sometimes they do. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-31_127_rights.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-31_127_rights.mp3 2:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash rights, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 20 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy One of the Right's whipping boys is “too many government regulations” but their arguments against regulations are unsophisticated & non-specific. The fact is that the success of America's Free Market commerce is primarily a result of carefully crafted regulations. For example, products & services with a high sensitivity to failure or monopolization require regulation, and abuse of resources important to us as a nation need regulations. Regulations are the rules-of-the-game, specifying the boundaries in which to play. If people have some kind of threat over their heads, even if it is unlikely they will ever get caught, most will not act illegally. Of course, there will always be crooks but by-in-large, people will mostly remain honest in the face of stricture, and will turn-in those they discover breaking the rules, whereas they would remain silent if the suspect act is not considered illegal. Regulations are too prone to exploitation to be enforced by the private sector which is why they're under government auspices. Unfortunately, people in government are as tempted by power & money as everyone else, and the regulators can be captured, meaning they work for interests of the businesses they are supposedly regulating. They do this by imposing regulations not to protect the public but instead to protect the vested interests of the industry. They do this by making the barrier to entry into a market so high that struggling entrepreneurs are at a distinct disadvantage or blocked out completely by onerous requirements, extended review procedures & deniable neglect. But even with these deficiencies, regulations are absolutely required for a functioning democratic society, however there is definitely a fine line between persuasion & a boot-on-your-neck. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-31_126_regulations.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-31_126_regulations.mp3 3:02 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash regulations, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 18 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Our country was founded on the concepts of freedom & liberty: every person can do whatever they please as long as it does not affect another person, and if it does then the conflict goes to the Courts. Total freedom & liberty, however, means every man is an island, without much hope of rebelling against a troop of Girl Scouts, let alone Great Britain, so we added an exception to “total freedom & liberty” and begrudgingly accepted a weak representative form of central government based on democracy. Unfortunately, exceptions invite exploitation: in the case of democracy, the majority could simply vote to take all the minority’s stuff. Hence, to prevent exploitative democracy, we protect the minority with a guarantee called the “Constitution.” The U.S. Constitution was the first one, and as great a concept as it is, there were flaws: Blacks were equivalent to 3/5ths of a White; women couldn't vote; the Vice President was the 2nd place presidential candidate; Senators were appointed, etc. Even in the beginning, the Amendments were a sign of this, they were added to fix the original document. Over the years it's gotten better, and sometimes worse, for example, Prohibition. Our republican form might be a bit dated, and economics, science, and law have certainly advanced beyond what John Lock, the philosopher who's ideas were incorporated into the Constitution, was thinking, but mostly the new Amendments have kept up. The U.S. Constitution makes "liberty" the primary goal, where liberty is defined as the rights of the individual come first unless due process of law. Other cultures are socialist, where the rights of the group outweigh the wants of individuals. If you're a "liberty" person, those other documents may seem inadequate. It was only chance that America ended up with a "liberty" constitution. That would not have been possible if Blacks and women were able to vote at the time. Liberty, personal empowerment, is much better for the advantaged, which is good for you & me but not so appealing to a slave, either in chains or in the kitchen. We were and are very lucky, there won’t be anymore modern day “liberty” constitutions. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-31_125_the_constitution.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-31_125_the_constitution.mp3 3:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash the constitution, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 16 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy 31% of American voters identify as Democrats. They are an amalgam of old-style Liberals, Progressives, unions, environmentalists, feminists, and the catchall for every other Special Interest group. They tend to be more idealistic, younger, more demonstrative, more ethnic, more culturally diverse, more agnostic, more union, more educated, more public services & more female. Just because someone is a Democrat doesn't make them liberal because the Democratric Party are where the socialists lie-in-wait, people who would benefit “from those according to their ability, to those according to their need.” The Democratic Party has recently been clucking on how they're losing more-n-more of the White Male vote, but that is actually a passive-aggressive way of advertising to non-Old White Guys because to many within the Party, White Males are the boogeyman. Gun ownership is a White Male thing, and gun demonization is intended to drive a wedge between OWG Democrats and the Progressives/socialists. The face of the Democratic Party has become the League of Women Voters, Public Employee Unions & Black-Lives-Matter. Basically, everybody who is intentionally & unintentionally excluded from the Republican Party and the spoils of entrenched interests. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_140_democrats.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-04-03_140_democrats.mp3 2:12 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash democrats, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 15 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy We had an eclectic mix of new concepts this time, let's review: 1. America's schizophrenic involvement in Syria's Civil War is a result of pressures from Israel, Saudia Arabia & Turkey. 2. ISIL's aspirations of establishment of a religious Caliphate is equivalent to Zionism. 3. A nation has no obligation to accept refugees. 4. Immigration brings entrepreneurs to America but it drains their home country of valuable human capital. 5. Illegal Immigration is facilitated by a cabal of Marxists, exploiters & self-interested Racists. 6. One of a nation's prerogatives is to control its borders & that might entail building a fence. 7. Luckily the average American is unaware of the rampant anti-Americanism of the European elite. 8. American has a history of Isolationism, and seems to be turning again in that direction. 9. The values & goals of Millennials have been shaped by their lack of career opportunities combined with a relaxed attitude towards traditional goals. 10. A National Dividend would make someone else responsible for you. 11. Student Loans indenture naive students & provide no Constitutionally guaranteed bankruptcy. 12 .Marriage is a State function with State goals. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-30_124_new_concepts_vol_11.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-30_124_new_concepts_vol_11.mp3 2:58 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 14 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberty is doing what you want unless The Law says differently. Legal prohibitions to various things must pass different levels of hurdles, and marriage is "strict scrutiny,” the highest hurdle. Without taking emotions & conservatism into account, restricting marriage, such as between same sex partners, related partners, or even multiple partners does not pass strict scrutiny, and using the word "legal" implies The Courts which implies the power of the State. Marriage is of interest to the State because married couples have special inheritance, medical, retirement, childcare benefits & responsibilities. The law considers the married partner as having a vested interest in the well-being of the other partner, and there are many volumes of case law defining & protecting that arrangement. When a person is in the hospital, or dies, or gifts, or is held responsible for some action, their marital status is very important because the law provides guidance for what to do. Even if the formalities of marriage have not occurred, the law still applies if the relationship meets the definition of a marriage. Marriage is not a religious issue & it is not a private issue, it is a State issue. Churches & private agreements can say whatever they want but The State overrides them when there is a discrepancy. Some people complain that opening the legal definition of marriage could lead to nonconformity with modern practices, but historical norms have other examples of expanded marriage options. One of government's three basic responsibilities is to provide contract enforcement and, in fact, right now a group of people could sit down and execute a contract for a polygamous relationship, and most States already have no problem with incestuous marriage. Marriage is an evolving issue that a democratic society will define as it sees fit. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-30_123_marriage.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-30_123_marriage.mp3 3:00 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash marriage, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There's a compelling & pervasive mythology in this country that every person must go to college, and there's' not much stipulation about what they learn. This narrative plays well into the educational industrial complex & the political machinations appeal to the socialist mentality & ambitions of students. Therefore, government felt compelled to distort traditional Market Forces by guaranteeing any student who wanted a loan, and going to the anti-Constitutional extreme of suspending their Right to bankruptcy. Now students who normally wouldn't have been able to get a loan without that bizarre exception are lured into having their life & career scarred by the naive exchange of a questionable education for a mountain of debt. The result is that tuition has gone up 1,100% since 1978, and 40 million students, almost 70% of graduates, owe $1.2 trillion. In fact, $200,000 in student debt at graduation is not uncommon: that's a repayment of $1,500 a month, about 40% of entry-level take-home pay, and because the loans have high interest rates, the amount owed is compounding wildly. Also, violating Free Market forces has influenced the cost of an education. The is partly through a lack of an adversarial relationship: students who by definition don't yet have wisdom are agreeing to lifelong servitude in exchange for exaggerated promises & misleading advice, and are artificially driving up the cost of college by increasing demand for the limited number of seats in brick-n-mortar didactic teaching institutions. And the educational industrial complex exploits its position via rent-seeking, gate-keeping, job pretension & degree inflation. Combined with tenure, public employee unions & ridiculous restrictions & morals, those institutions can't be pressured to change, so they fester & metastasize into the economy writ large. Worse, lots of "students" live off their student loans & never had any intention of getting a degree but simply work the system like people are wont to do if not scrutinized. However, unlike credit card abusers, these young people cannot declare bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is in the Constitution for an important reason: because Fascists use debt as a way to control the masses. And they're the only loans that can't be refinanced: so that 9% interest is forever. The whole Student Loan shtick was a cynical ploy to create indentured servants. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-30_122_student_loans.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-30_122_student_loans.mp3 3:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash student loans, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 10 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy When robots do most menial labor and computers do the rest, the hypothesis is that society will give people the opportunity to pursue more enlightened goals, better entertainment & contentment, by providing a monthly stipend, euphemistically called “National Dividend.” These folks suggest that if citizens had a baseline income then they wouldn't be forced into taking low-paying jobs & employers would have to raise wages. They claim that a National Dividend will stabilize communities because people wouldn't have to leave to find a job. Advocates also say a National Dividend would allow both parents to stay home with the children, touted as “putting families first.” The problems with this Utopian concept are threefold: first, there are a lot of folks, especially Millennials, who assign no value, maybe even negative value, to Work Ethic. A nation needs citizens to be productive rather than consumptive or the whole economy would collapse from the weight of Free-Ridership. Secondly, a National Dividend would be a Right, which impinges on the liberty of others because they would become responsible for providing the Free Money. And without Market Forces, who decides which National Dividendees are more equal than others, and perhaps need more money so that they can "do something that makes a difference"? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-30_121_national_dividend.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-30_121_national_dividend.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash national dividend, dole, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 08 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Only 10% of Millennials, those born roughly between 1980-2000, have completed the Big 5 Goals In Life, which are: spouse, career, children, house & education by the time they are 30, verses 70% for Gen-Xers, the previous generation. If you talk to many Millennials, the reason why is obvious, those things aren't what's important to them, maybe because they seem unobtainable to most Millennials, or maybe because they are not being forced by circumstances to dedicate their lives to making a living. In fact, the values of the previous generation may not even apply: Millennials may not want to be the economic powerhouse of the World, nor the World's policeman. Many would be satisfied with a National Stipend that would take care of basic needs so that they never had to work. Millennials want self-actualization & to think what they're doing "makes a difference." They travel, do extreme sports & gather together multiple nights per week to hang out. Entertainment is made by them & tailored for them. The new “family unit" seems very similar to the family unit of old: a couple generations living together, or multiple Millennials all sharing the same living space & costs. Millenials live where they want, do what they want, many do not get married, and only a faction have children of their own. Millennials are ideally positioned to take the pleasures from life, not spend the majority of their time chasing ephemeral goals. I sometimes wonder if I would have pursued my life as single-mindedly had I that option, or would I have simply opted out, like Millennials do? Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-29_120_millennials.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-29_120_millennials.mp3 2:46 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash millennials, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 06 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Liberty is the concept that you are an island unto yourself, only subject to contracts you voluntarily engage in, while socialism is implied obligations, and Marxists explicitly say that you are responsible for the actions of others. People raised in America, the only Liberty nation, are caught off-guard in a socialist setting where others are tacitly waiting for them to act. Liberalists aren't looking for nor aware of the social clues of obligation, and are embarrassed & confused when comforted about their perceived inaction. This fundamental difference in ideologies makes engagement between the two groups, liberalists & socialists, fraught with angst & anger. In fact, less contact may be for the best. Certainly one side trying to impose their ideology on the other is distinctly illiberal. This goes for all forced value systems whether they be political, religious or commerce: friction is inevitable. Over-arching para-national organizations like the UN are especially pernicious, but "Free" Trade has the most at home impact, exploiting as it does destitute labor in other countries only to impoverish our own, to the benefit of a small Nouveau Aristocracy. But worse, ceding of our sovereignty to international courts, trade tribunals, and military pacts is extremely anti-democratic & certainly not in the best interests of private individuals, violating as it does the very essence of liberty. America was founded on an expectation of isolationism, its people are comfortable with isolationism, and there are numerous examples of America suffering after compromising that standard. China is isolationist, Russia is isolationist, most other nations are successfully isolationist within their own sphere of influence. America has been successfully isolationist before & should move that direction again in the name of liberty. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-29_119_isolationism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-29_119_isolationism.mp3 3:07 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash isolationism, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 04 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In foreign European-influenced countries, the adults of my generation demean everything about America: our manufacturing, our intelligence, even our military, but they still have enough memory of America’s generosity to trigger some modicum of objectivity, and they mostly act civil to tourists & travelers. Unfortunately, the children of those people, the Millennials and younger, have no such positive counterbalance. These young people hold an opinion of America spoon-fed by their anti-American elders & foreign media, resulting in disdain, scorn, and ridicule. To the rest of the world, Americans are “The Simpsons.” There is no repairing that perception & America shouldn't even try: if other people's opinions change your actions then they are in control. Another equally important concern is what typical Americans think of other countries. Currently, most Americans are guilty of benign neglect, blissfully unaware of the contempt in which they are held by foreigners. But people don’t like people who don’t like them, so if the general American public ever becomes aware of the odious regard of their worldly counterparts, American foreign policy will be radically realigned. America has a long history of isolationism, expect those feelings to reemerge with a vengeance if or when we start paying attention to who has the knife in our backs. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-29_118_anti-americanism.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-29_118_anti-americanism.mp3 2:35 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash anti-Americanism, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 02 Sep 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy How or even rather to maintain a country's borders is hotley contested. Because we are a Liberty nation, subjective questions are decided by Rule of Law, so until it's changed through democracy, Americans deserve & expect at least practical enforcement of their immigration policy, which would include border control if for no other reason than safety. Practically, border control from Canada has not been an issue, but the border with Mexico has a long history of abuse, and a physical barrier is needed, but there are constituencies who do not want to do so: Marxists want open borders so that all people get a chance to share equally in America's bounty; many Hispanics have family members & loved ones who would like to join them in America; cheap-labor-exploiters, such as farmers & contractors, certainly don't want a Fence for profit motives; and there are even some cynical Democratic strategists that want the potential votes & populism of new immigrants. But is that a majority of Americans? No, as demonstrated by the political popularity of controlling the border. There are other advantages of building a Border Fence: by stemming the tide of Illegal Immigrants, there will be a political opportunity to give the existing ones citizenship. Also, many of the problems in the Inner-City cannot be solved until the constant influx of poor immigrants is stopped. Plus, building & manning a Border Fence is a great infrastructure Make-Work program, and only a little prescience is required to guess that Climate Change will cause massive refugees, and we'll certainly need a Border Fence before that. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-29_117_border_fence.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-29_117_border_fence.mp3 2:53 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash border fence, border wall, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 31 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy From my indoctrinated-since-childhood position, I think everyone in the world would want to immigrate to the United States. Liberty is a wonderful thing: look at all we have. The U.S. already allows by far the most legal immigrants of any nation on earth, and the problem of Illegal Immigrants is easy to understand but it conflicts with the liberty of our current citizens because those other people are doing things that impact us. How much & what those impacts are is up for debate but border control is one of a nation's main prerogatives. It's our nation, we decide what we want, and outsiders' opinions have no bearing. However, even with these convictions, our country’s cynical reliance on Illegal Immigration, and our political capitulation to immigration Special Interests, is criminal. The major instigating factor is jobs: Illegal Immigrants are willing to work the low-prestige jobs at low wages, and they are great employees: no Minimum Wage, child labor, poor living conditions, sexual exploitation, everything you would expect of an unprotected underclass. And it has giant scope: the collaborators are more numerous than the 10-25 million Illegals. We're talking Underground Railroad levels of collaboration, as dedicated to Illegal Immigration as any anti-slavery group was 150 years ago. No solution could possibly involve deporting whole communities, or keeping them in perpetual servitude & fear, so the only solution is citizenship. It might even be as easy as simply waiting for the next generation of birth citizenship to naturally take care of the problem, and as long as the borders are secure to stop the inflow of Illegal Immigrants into this country, that's the easiest answer. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_116_illegal_immigration.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_116_illegal_immigration.mp3 2:57 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash illegal immigration, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 29 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy America is a liberal nation with a lot of legal immigrants: the equivalent of what Europe & Russia combined allow in a normal year. We are a nation that welcomes immigrants because we all decended from immigrants. It's taught in our schools & the image of the hardworking immigrant gets reinforced every time we meet one because there are no greater advocates of the American ideal of free enterprise than newly arrived, hopeful, enthusiastic, optimistic immigrants. Almost all immigrants are hardworking, loyal, thankful, and conscientious. In fact, without immigrants, “The American Way” would probably collapse since so much of our innovation & productivity comes from a small segment of our population, and many immigrants are among them. But even with those positive feelings towards immigrants, we set the limit at 675K legal immigrants a year, mostly only the cream of the crop but 70K of them are refugees and 55K come through a lottery. We set limits because as a nation that's what we want. We'll vote if we want to increase immigration, no sanctimonious, self-righteous, my-values-are-paramount immigration advocates can override it. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_115_immigration.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_115_immigration.mp3 2:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash immigration, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 27 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Any discussion of refugees is a cesspool of sanctimonious scolding & moral posturing. Europe will take millions of refugees rather than do something about ISIL. Germany lets refugees rape their women & blames the women. On this issue, the U.S. has more in common with Russia & China. Frankly, I don't understand The West's willingness to be manipulated? Especially by legality arguments from non-lawyers, and the "treaties" that get mentioned anytime there's a discussion about refugees are meaningless. The U.S. was not even a signatory on the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” and the “Declaration on Territorial Asylum” was simply political, just fuzzy moral principles of the kind the U.N. is always promulgating. If these things ever got on the floor of the U.S. House, they'd get smashed. Even socialist Europe doesn't turn them into real law. In comparison to refugees, immigrants are the cream-of-the-crop: they deplete their home country of valuable human capital to our benefit so it's a positive transaction. Refugees, however, bring all of the incompetents along too. No one blames the refugees for wanting to emigrate: we'd all be refugees too in similar circumstances, but the answer is simply to side with liberty, which means that a nation's people make the decision if they want to admit refugees & how many. There's no moral, value, ethic or law that overrides The People's will. I'm curious how long the current refugee crisis goes on & how it finally resolves because it's a preview of the looming Climate Change refugees problem. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_114_refugees.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_114_refugees.mp3 3:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash refugees, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 25 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There's a familiar ring to an ancient religion returning to occupy lands in the Middle East after a millennium, using terror as necessary, not allowing the indigenous people the same rights as the occupier, and absolute certitude their cause is God's will. Israel did it, and ISIL is just trying to do the same thing: establish a foretold Caliphate in lands that God promised to them. It's a kind of fundamentalism that satisfies the very basis of their religion: Christians cheer on Zionists, and Muslims cheer on the Caliphate. ISIL took advantage of the sectarianship & power vacuum in both Iraq & Syria with secret support from Turkey & other parts of Islam. The U.S. caused it to happen by creating suitable conditions for the Caliphate to emerge, but rather than get involved in the Middle East yet again, this time America needs to stay away & take a wait-n-see attitude: first, will ISIL succeed in an area already filled with Caliphate-like nations? Are they an imminent threat to the West any more than the Zionists are? Wait to see if they've cooled off after a generation or two. If there is reason enough, America took out Iraq's ability to wage war in 4 days & they could do the same to the Caliphate. Plus, Iran in now out of their box & they have the power to impose order on the region. It's not all the beheadings that got war-weary Americans in a lather, it was ISIL destroying ancient artifacts in Palmyra. But that's nothing new, in the pyramids all the hieroglyphics as far up as a man can reach were chiseled off by 16th & 17th-century Muslims as sacrilegious. But is it really any of our business? Europe doesn't seem to care & they've got terrorists shooting up concert halls & immigrating by the millions. Mostly ISIL is just words & sensationalism: if Russia & the U.S. actually worked together, let Assad alone & kill bad guys with drones, ISIL would be wrapped up in a few years. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_113_isil.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_113_isil.mp3 3:21 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash ISIL, ISIS, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 23 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy It's interesting & concerning to witness the propaganda machine begin an indoctrination cycle on the American people on what we should think of foreign nations: first it was Iraq, then Iran, and now Syria. It beggars the question of why all of these countries are in the Middle East, no other parts of the world get demonization of their leaders in quite the same way? Oil is cynically touted as the root cause but oil comes from all over the world, no, these smear campaigns & interventions have a more diabolical origin & superb organization behind them. Who are these loud "invade Syria" warmongers, the shadowy figures standing behind John McCain & Lindsey Graham when they prattle incoherently about military action? Those are the true culprits. I have my money on Israel because there are dozens of other examples of Israel-shilling from those two & other Israel-first people. And the entire U.S. anti-Assad stance seems to be nothing more than doing Israel/Turkey/Saudi Arabia's bidding. Why is the U.S. is involved in Syria but letting Palestinians suck wind? And why aren't we fomenting unrest in Saudi Arabia, the nation that flew airplanes into the Twin Towers, and how can ISIL be less important than Syria? I've never been one for conspiracies but the whole "invade Syria" narrative is not getting enough investigative reporting. We can barely get a discussion going on the topic because no one knows anything, just vague “chemical weapons” & “barrel bombs” charges. Why is the U.S. backing the overthrow of a sovereign nation, especially since it seems like ISIL are the ones who want to do the overthrowing? Don't we ever learn our lesson about interfering in the affairs of other countries? Thank goodness Putin pulled Obama's butt outta the fire before we put "troops on the ground." Let Assad be, ally with Syria & Russia to defeat ISIL, make some kind of deal then get out. Europe, who obviously will do nothing else, can take all the refugees. Problem solved. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_112_syria.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_112_syria.mp3 3:22 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash Syria, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 21 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The new concepts & original ideas just keep coming, let's review: 1. The Military is the greatest U.S. Jobs Program ever. 2. Physical prowess is used to demean women in the military but the real concern is runaway pregnancy. 3. A forced military draft is little more than enslavement. 4. The best Foreign Policy is targeted airstrikes followed by “good luck to the new guy.” 5. The Military Industrial Complex is the closest thing to an American oligopoly. 6. NATO is an anachronistic remnant of preening technocrats. 7. The EU is Germany's attempt to subjugate Europe without firing a shot. 8. The UN provides a semblance of democracy to relieve building international political pressures. 9. Much of the Religious Right supports Israel over our own government because they think Jesus will come back sooner. 10. Palestinian apartheid should get the international condemnation & censure it deserves. You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_111_new_concepts_vol_10.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-28_111_new_concepts_vol_10.mp3 2:31 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 19 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The biggest problem with Zionism, the gathering of the special people to the special land before the end of the world, is what to do with the people who were already there. Palestinians are named after the land “Palestine” that existed before Israel took it over claiming historical birthright. Obviously the indigenous Palestinians who had lived there for Millennium yet now can't even buy nor lease land didn't quite see it the same way, otherwise Jewish "settlers" probably wouldn't be getting randomly stabbed. As a solution, Israel's foreign minister has suggested that disloyal Palestinians should be beheaded. American Zionists don't dance around the issue either: their proposed solution is forced expatriation of Palestinians to other Arab nations or outright genocide. Pushing the Palestinians into the sea is perfectly acceptable to these people because then Jesus will come. There's been cycles of almost peace then new settlements, or fence, or no voting Rights, or bulldozing neighborhoods, or pulling up 500-year old olive groves, or embargo, or non-recognition of elected officials, blah, blah, blah... Some Palestinians throw rocks, or scream hate chants, or fire off some homemade rockets, but somehow Zionists claim it's the Palestinians fault? The problem can be solved if the World recognizes Palestine, forces Israel to dismantle the Zionist settlements, give Palestinians the same Rights as Jews, and the U.S. stops allowing its foreign policy to be dictated by a religion. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-27_110_palestinians.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-27_110_palestinians.mp3 2:42 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash palestinians, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 17 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Israel was created in 1948 as a result of terrorism by newly immigrant Jews against the British, forcing many native Palestinians out as refugees into surrounding countries. Israel then expanded its boundaries through force in a surprise 1967 war with its neighbors, intentionally attempted to sink the U.S.S. Liberty, a U.S. spy ship, to keep it from warning others, and Israel continues to expand into Palestinian territory through illegal settlements. In the U.N., Israel is universally condemned for its actions, and is only supported by the U.S., yet it makes threats when Palestine also tries to join the U.N. And if it's suggested that perhaps Israel is responsible for their own actions, in fly the apologists claiming anyone who doesn't support Zionism is an anti-Semite. It's pretty clear that Israel's self-interest runs counter to what most people in the world think is fair, but so does America's. A Foreign Policy that primarily consists of might-makes-right is okay as along as it is rational but Jews & American Christians, think the Right of Jews to occupy Israel comes from God, called Zionism. Zionism is fundamentalism, just as ISIL is, and for the same reasons: thinking you are God’s chosen people and superior to everyone else always causes otherwise intelligent and admirable folks to act like aggressive, self-righteous fools. The irony is that the Zionist's treatment of Palestinians is eerily like how the Jews were treated in Nazi Germany. If Israel wants peace with its neighbors, it will have to negotiate one because dictating isn't going to work. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-27_109_israel.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-27_109_israel.mp3 2:59 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash israel, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 15 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy There are 193 nations in the United Nations, headquartered in New York. It was established right after WWII in an attempt to prevent future wars. Its operations are financed by assessments on member nations according to their GNP with the U.S., of course, being the largest at over $3 billion a year, a quarter of the total budget: reasonable as long as it serves America's best interests but that's often questionable because no where do ideological differences so stymie productive action than in the United Nations because global socialists are intent on wealth redistribution from America to rest of the World. The U.N. also wraps an aura of legitimacy around clearly Marxian thoughts & goals that are not amenable to liberty. Plus, responsibilities are often thrust onto the U.S., a common socialist tactic. At its worst, the U.N. serves as a platform for preening, grandstanding & disingenuous behavior, and the relationships between countries is a queer mixture of paternalism & sycophants. But at its best, the U.N. satisfactorily embraces tribalism, giving all the nations a forum in which to speak, thereby serving as a pressure-relief valve, and indeed there has been no large-scale warfare since its inception, and it was integral to the Cold War winding down peacefully. Just in that ombudsman capacity, the U.N. seems a worthwhile investment as long as America does not capitulate its own sovereignty over to it as some kind of World Overlord. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-26_108_the_un.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-26_108_the_un.mp3 2:39 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash the UN, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 13 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Combining small self-governing countries into a larger omnipotent organization using a common currency is not appropriate for culturally divergent societies because cultures with vastly different goals & work ethics inevitable exploit one another. Plus a country that loses control of its currency, loses its ability to inflate away government debt. Only multinational corporations are pushing for reduced sovereignty, and since their goal is economic advantage, their rules are too. I don't have a whole lot of sympathy or concern for the profits of corporations and, frankly I don't know anyone who does, so I'm at a loss at how the EU snookered so many presumably rational nations to join? Perhaps socialist types like monolithic nations for reasons of equality & paternalism. In an equality mindset, the concept of responsibility for your own actions is not a strong one. The people of small nations like Greece see the affluence of larger, more modern European countries, like Germany, and say "I want that." They were admitted to the EU primarily for geographic & historical reasons, and then borrow huge amounts of money, mostly for healthcare & pensions; this goes on for a decade-or-so then they need multiple angst-generating bailouts. There is & never was any way they could have ever paid back the loans to the foreign banks who encouraged them to borrow the money, their culture simply isn't productive enough, and the EU knew that when they granted membership, resulting in an odd if-you-owe-enough-to-the-bank-the-bank-works-for-you kind of situation. Is a United States of Europe even possible? It all comes down to German voters who will be footing the bill for the weaker countries for the foreseeable future. If they truly believe in their socialist ideals, the norm will be for Germany's workers to support less productive nations, plus the big nations that collapse, plus all the immigrants, and all the new EU petitioners looking for such a great deal. But there are lots of socialists in Europe so democracy explains it, unless the EU is simply Germany's way of finally conquering Europe without firing a shot. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-26_107_the_eu.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-26_107_the_eu.mp3 3:28 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash The EU, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Thu, 11 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy NATO is the very definition of an anachronism: it's conspicuously old-fashioned, from another time when the empire it was intended to confront has not been in existence for over a quarter-century. It's unclear whether NATO even serves U.S. purposes. NATO isn't about Europe and they know it, so they exploit the relationship. NATO-Europe contributes well short of the 2% promise that all NATO members were supposed to adhere to as gentlemen. In fact, while European membership in NATO has nearly doubled since 1990, defense spending by Europeans has gone down by 28%. The Europeans don’t contribute because they don’t want to, and don’t have to because the U.S. will simply bear the full burden of cost without them. NATO is from the days of paternalism, and most Western Europeans see it as nothing but American finger-in-the-pie. The ostensible NATO enemy is Russia, which most Western Europeans don't see as relevant to their security. The NATO nations demanding NATO intervention are Estonia & Latvia whom, combined, contribute only 11,000 troops. Ukraine & Georgia now want to join NATO: these nations were not only part of the Soviet Union but were also historically part of the Russian Empire. Bringing them into NATO is equivalent to Mexico & Canada joining Russia. Are Americans and Europeans expected to risk nuclear war over pissant countries? And why does that chance even exist? NATO is long past its reason to exist, and is nothing more than a dangerous war trigger that also happens to sap American resources for things not in America's interest. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-26_106_nato.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-26_106_nato.mp3 3:01 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash NATO, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Tue, 09 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy In President Eisenhower's 1961 Farewell Address he presciently warned Americans of an imminent danger, he said, “we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex.” Military spending accounts for over half of all federal discretionary spending, almost $600 billion, and almost 40% of the world total. The U.S. spent more on its military than the next 13 nations combined. There are almost 2000 private companies working on counter-terrorism, homeland security, and intelligence, and over 50 federal organizations and military commands tracking the flow of money in terrorist networks. The MIC is definitely the “jobs” part of the greatest Jobs Program in the world. It is obviously unwise to have those with a vested interest in war seeking to advise and influence U.S. foreign policy but this largest, most powerful Special Interest group pressures presidential candidates into supporting military adventurism with large political contributions. They also have a tight monetary relationship with legislators, write laws & even specify political appointments. The MIC is the closest thing to an American oligopoly. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-26_105_mic.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-26_105_mic.mp3 2:36 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash military industrial complex, MIC, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sun, 07 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy Back-in-the-day, America's interactions with the rest of the World were called foreign “adventures” or “entanglements” which are great words to describe our clumsy, lumbering foreign policy. Societies are complicated. We American's have no understanding of why people in far away lands are seemingly indiscriminately killing each other? But someone from there would understand so let the problems of other nations work themselves out until equilibrium is reached. Our presence in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Japan & Germany for-that-matter, are unsustainable because those places aren't America. As for America's interests: if something is big enough and bad enough that we need to invest blood & treasure, we have ample proof that we can do it from 30,000 feet & 5,000 miles away, then "good luck to the new guy." There's no “winning” the kinds of conflicts we've been getting into. We can't win because we have a superiority complex: we think democracy should be spread around the world, or women should be able to drive, or drug use can be stopped. If people in the armpit of the world massacre each other, we think it’s our job to straighten things out, as if we know better. If there's going to be foreign entanglements, we should do it with money or with drones, and if it gets really bad... Nukes. Soldiers are for short-term-overwhelming-force-mopping-up-then-gone action. Otherwise, keep away from the hornet's nest, and spend dollars like we print the things. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-25_104_foreign_policy.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-25_104_foreign_policy.mp3 2:43 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash foreign policy, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Fri, 05 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The military is an admirable career for those who want it, and absolutely essential, but it is not a religion. There is a contingent in America that insists the military also embodies other obligations & benefits; they use words like “patriotism,” “duty” & “building character” to insist that everyone should be forced to enlist. Ignoring the obvious mystical aspects of that assertion, the impact on liberty essentially amounts to enslavement. A draft is only acceptable as a method of last resort under the most dire of exigent threats to the existence of our society. The single biggest thing someone has to give to be part of society is their life & their children's lives in defense of the collective. That's their big chip, and if they don't like how society is working out for them, they can opt out of the "life" part. Therefore it behooves policy-makers to be inclusive in their legislation: the best for everyone includes keeping the masses of prospective soldiers amendable to the idea of joining the military. And the military also has to respond when enlistment is voluntary: if it's too onerous, pays to little or is not accommodating to families, it will be unable to attract recruits. An all-volunteer military is the very essence of liberty. And certainly if there does have to be a draft, it cannot be limited by sex, race or religion. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-25_103_the_draft.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-25_103_the_draft.mp3 2:32 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash the draft, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Wed, 03 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The issue of women in the military immediately goes to how many push-ups a female can do verses a male, which is a specious argument because if physical prowess is truly essential to the functioning of a soldier, the defining factor between success & failure in a mission, then we have technology & pharmacology to improve that for both sexes. But soldiers in the military aren't on forced regimes of steroids & amphetamines, so that's not the reason. No, the resistance to women in the military is almost entirely conservative reticence based on custom, tradition, and the ritual role of women in society. We all know the whole “hiking 10 days with an 80-pound pack on your back” argument is a debating trick used to obscure the real compromise. Women have been in the military for decades now and we know what the problem is, however, the real issue crashes up against both political correctness & Protestant sensibilities: namely that 11% of all female soldiers have unplanned pregnancies at any one time, and the number of women who get pregnant during enlistment is over 20%. Plus, almost half of women leave the military before their enlistment is over. The problem, if it really is one, isn't how much a gal can carry on her back, the problem is laying on it. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-25_102_women_in_the_military.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-25_102_women_in_the_military.mp3 2:20 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash women in the military, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Mon, 01 Aug 2016 07:00:00 -0700 Politics & Philosophy The military is the greatest jobs program in America. It employees many, many people who would not otherwise be employed, it teaches them to be responsible for themselves & how to follow authority, it gives them pride in themselves & their country, and it gives them role models & maturity. Some people complain that minorities are over-represented in the military but that's simply a sign that it's working, especially with All-Volunteer recruitment. The military also serves as an example of successful socialist totalitarianism, not something to be emulated in other parts of government but it does provide useful perspective. Military expenditures are also a Keynesian wet-dream: train people to design bombs, train people to build bombs, train people to drop bombs, bombs explode, repeat. Plus, there's no competition with the private sector, no supplanting private employment production opportunities with public employment consumption. The Military Industrial Complex is probably the best kind of stimulus spending there is because all education & income levels are represented. This is contrary to something like the Space Program or basic medical research, which have laudable goals & fill a public need, but only employ people that could just as easily be in the private sector because they are so highly trained. Lastly, and most importantly, the military does serve the very important function of protecting us from the tribe across the hill. Every nation needs Eisenhowers to protect its Einsteins. Politics & Philosophy https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-25_101_military.mp3 https://www.martinhash.com/podcast/?name=2016-03-25_101_military.mp3 2:42 Martin@Hash.com (Martin Hash) Martin Hash military, politics, humor, philosophy, Martin Hash no Sat, 30 Jul 2016 07:00:00 -0700