Lessons from the Totalitarian Past Augusto Zimmerman

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/the-law/2021/12/lessons-from-the-totalitarian-past/
It is increasingly clear the principle of legality is no longer regarded as important by some elements of the judicial elite, at least insofar as governments can allege the ’emergencies’ they declare justify the enactment of measures that profoundly affect our fundamental rights and freedoms. There is an unsettling precedent for the law’s endorsement of the unacceptable.

Excerpts

Unfortunately, the Australian legal profession has generally accepted the use of emergency powers by the executive government, thus enabling authorities to issue executive orders that impose heavy fines and imprisonment for non-compliance with certain arbitrary measures. Apparently, even the principle of legality is no longer regarded as important by some elements within the judicial elite, at least insofar as the government can allege that an “emergency” justifies the enactment of measures that profoundly affect the enjoyment of our fundamental rights and freedoms.

When one looks at the German legal profession in the 1930s, leaving aside those who were committed to the Nazi ideology, it becomes apparent that legal positivism played a significant role in the failure of lawyers to stand up against the Nazi atrocities. As noted the late Charles Rice, when the Nazis moved against the Jews, most lawyers who personally opposed the Nazi regime were ‘disarmed’ by legal positivism.[8] This wouldn’t be so if those lawyers had responded to the early Nazi injustices with a sound and principled denunciation rooted in traditional principles of the natural law. However, embedded in the positivist dogma that ‘law is law’ regardless of its substantive nature, many German lawyers became defenceless against laws of arbitrary or criminal content.[9] Because such lawyers ‘argued that the evolution of law should be viewed as following purely positive patterns’, Seitzer and Thornhill explains, ‘they concluded that the validity of law depended on its status as an internally consistent set of rules, and it could not be reconstructed or interpreted on the basis of moral prescriptions’.[10]

However, the vast majority of lawyers in Germany were supportive of Hitler. These lawyers embraced the notion that Germany was an organic unity and the spectacle of a divided parliament was unnatural to them. The principal characteristic of German lawyers, including law professors, was illiberalism.[21] The German legal profession generally welcomed Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor.[22] In October 1933, in their annual convention at Leipzig, 10,000 lawyers raised their right arms in a Nazi salute and swore, ‘by the soul of the German people’, that they would ‘strive to follow the course of our Führer to the end of days’.[23] On that very day the official journal of the Ministry of Justice exhorted the German legal profession to ‘march as an army corps of the Führer’.[24]

The Reich Minister, Hans Frank, was the head of the German Bar Association (1933–42), the Elected President of the International Chamber of Law (1941–42), and also President of the Academy of German Lawyers. Frank
believed that ‘the basis for the interpretation of all legal sources is the National Socialist ideology that is particularly manifested in the party program and the Führer’s statements’.

The Extraordinary Hidden Costs of the Climate-Change Transition By Edwin T. Burton

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/12/the-extraordinary-hidden-costs-of-the-climate-change-transition/?utm_source=

How climate policy will weaken the West

T o achieve per capita economic growth, an economy must either produce goods and services that were not previously produced or produce the existing goods and services in a more efficient way. If an economy continues to produce the old goods and services but replaces the inputs with a more costly set of inputs, per capita growth will be negative. Such an economy would become poorer over time and less wealthy in per capita terms. This is the likely future of the U.S. and Europe as they stumble their way toward an effort to transition their economies to a different, more expensive, set of energy sources.

If, as a homeowner, you were suddenly told that you needed to rebuild your home with a whole new set of more costly materials, you would not be pleased. But if the goal of this costly rebuilding were saving the planet, you might tolerate the transition.

Hoping to spare you and your neighbors the harmful effects of your current building materials, you begin the transition. The fact that there is a target date for this transition will, of course, dramatically increase the costs of this transition, which will be considerable in any event. When the transition is complete, you will have less wealth than you would have had, had there been no such transition. But you say to yourself, at least I am doing some future good for me and my neighbors. Saving the planet seems like a worthwhile goal.

Looking down the block you see multiple new homes being constructed utilizing the exact same materials that you are being asked to remove from your house. These materials are much cheaper than those used in the project on which you embarked, and thus your neighbors, constructing their new homes, will likely be prospering by producing their homes, identical to yours in most respects, by using the cheaper building materials.

Biden’s Travel Restrictions Don’t Follow the Science By Joel Zinberg

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/12/bidens-travel-restrictions-dont-follow-the-science/

The rules should apply to everyone, regardless of citizenship or residency status, and use all the scientific tools available.

 J oe Biden never tires of saying his COVID-19 policies follow “the science.” He recently pontificated that he would battle the emerging Omicron coronavirus variant “with science and speed, not chaos and confusion.” So why is he relying on policies that he earlier criticized as xenophobic and ineffective and that are being condemned around the world as racist?

Back in January 2020, little was known about the emerging disease COVID-19 and the virus that causes it, SARS-CoV-2. Tests, vaccines, and treatments were unavailable. All that anyone knew for sure was that the disease seemed to have started in Wuhan, China, and that is where nearly all the known cases were. The Trump administration announced on January 31, 2020, that the United States would temporarily suspend the entry of foreign nationals who had been in China during the prior 14-day period.

Later that day, Biden accused Trump of “xenophobia” and “fear mongering.” So-called “fact checkers” labored mightily to claim that Biden wasn’t specifically referring to the China travel ban when he made his remarks because he might not have been aware of the travel restrictions. But he certainly was aware of the ban when he tweeted the next day, “We are in the midst of a crisis with the coronavirus. We need to lead the way with science — not Donald Trump’s record of hysteria, xenophobia, and fear-mongering.” On March 12, 2020, after Trump expanded the travel ban to include Europe, Biden tweeted, “Banning all travel from Europe — or any other part of the world — will not stop it.”

Biden campaign adviser and now White House chief of staff Ron Klain was certainly aware of the travel restrictions when he testified to Congress on February 5, five days after they were announced. Klain labeled the restrictions an ineffective “Band-Aid” because they did not cover American citizens traveling from China and were based on “the color of the passport someone carries.”

‘Flash Mobs’ By James Dillon

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/12/flash_mobs_.html

“We need to be shocked by a generation’s bold descent into anomy. When absence of conscience becomes commonplace, when sociopaths loiter around every corner and patrol every sidewalk, and when the fruits of a liberal society fall largely to those who least appreciate the origins and purposes of our freedoms, then promises of life, liberty, and happiness for all are in jeopardy, and democracy itself is at stake.”

The facile assembly of large mobs of miscreants to raid retailers in San Francisco, Oakland, and Los Angeles is even more alarming than it seems.

The events are novel and even a bit entertaining, posing only a minor challenge to law enforcement if police are permitted to intercede.

More important than the incidents per se, however, is what they may reveal about the participants.

Lootings have been widely reported, mainly on the West Coast.  At Union Square in the heart of San Francisco:

“At least 40 thieves allegedly broke into a Louis Vuitton store on Friday [November 26], grabbing whatever they could before loading it into a series of cars parked curbside out front. The shoplifting caravan cut a swath through San Francisco’s high-end boutiques, creating a scene of chaos while stealing more than $1 million in merchandise.”

The New York Post described the another event, in Oakland, California:

“Hey, look — here are 80 people engaged in a large-scale smash-and-grab robbery of a Nordstrom in Walnut Creek outside San Francisco last weekend, one of a series of jaw-dropping thefts over the last several days, including an operation that cleared out a Louis Vuitton on San Francisco’s Union Square.”

Another Oakland location had  two similar lootings:

 “Prime 365 says more than 30 burglars ran through their store.

“In [a] video, you can see a long line of people rushing in, and in one instance, even pushing each other out of the way to grab hats off a shelf.”

Although the signature of these attacks is the large number of offenders, several robberies have involved, in each instance, only a handful of perpetrators (perps). Press accounts do not distinguish assaults with dozens of offenders from those with only a few, using the same terms – “flash mobs” and “smash and grab,”” for both.

Buttigieg’s Ambitions Have Always Been Detached From His Mismanagement Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2021/12/buttigiegs-ambitions-have-always-been-detached-his-daniel-greenfield/

Everyone knows someone who was touted as bright, an achiever, and most likely to succeed… not because they actually ever did anything, but because that was their image.

That’s Buttigieg in a nutshell.

Some politicians build cults of personality around them. Buttigieg is one of those honor students who makes his ambition seem like aspiration, entirely apart from anything they’ve actually accomplished. You weren’t supposed to ask what Obama had actually done to deserve the Senate and the White House. Likewise, you’re not supposed to look at Buttigieg’s actual record.

Buttigieg is currently being touted as the Dem candidate in 2024 even while the supply chain crisis that he’s supposed to be addressing is wrecking the economy.

It’s a strange mismatch between the headlines that could have been written by his PAC and the reporting on the actual consequences of the DOT’s inaction and incompetence on his watch.

But that was always the case. 

When I visited South Bend, it was a disaster, but the media’s one story about the place was how Buttigieg had brought “hope” to it. His presidential run was accompanied by virtually no scrutiny about his time there, aside from a police shooting of a black man.

Buttigieg’s disastrous mismanagement of South Bend and now the DOT has never impeded his political ambitions. Like Obama, he insists that he should be judged by his aspirations, not by his accomplishments.

Americans, like the residents of South Bend, are already paying the price for Buttigieg’s ambition and incompetence. 

Black Lives Matter….in their own words

https://blacklivesmatter.com/black-xmas/

Black Xmas

As we prepare ourselves for the holiday season, we are bombarded with ads that seek to whip us up into a consumerist frenzy. Black Friday sales are being rolled out weeks in advance of Thanksgiving and, at every turn, white-supremacist-capitalism is telling us to spend our money on things that we don’t need, to reap profits for corporations.

As BLMLA organizer, Jan Williams, reminds us, “Capitalism doesn’t love Black people.” In fact, white-supremacist-capitalism invented policing, initially as chattel-slavery-era “paddy rollers,” in order to protect its interests and put targets on the backs of Black people. Under modern-day policing, those targets have been affixed to the backs of Black people like, #JohnCrawford and #StevenTaylor, who were murdered by police inside Walmart stores; like #YuvetteHenderson and #RedelJones, Black mothers who were accused of petty thefts before their lives were stolen by police; and like #AlbertRamonDorsey and #DennisToddRogers, who were gunned down when 24-Hour-Fitness locations called in police on Black male patrons…twice.

Beginning in 2014, in response to John Crawford’s murder by police in Beavercreek, Ohio, Black Lives Matter has been challenging people to “dream of a #BlackXmas,” to intentionally use our economic resources to disrupt white-supremacist-capitalism and build Black community:

#BuildBlack: Invest in Black-led, Black-serving organizations by making donations in the names of your loved ones as holiday gifts.
#BuyBlack: When buying items, spend exclusively with Black-owned businesses from Black Friday through New Year.
#BankBlack: Move your money from white corporate banks (that finance gentrification, prisons, and environmental degradation) to Black-owned ones.

Wondering where to start? Resources are available at blackxmas.org.

We’re also taking your suggestions! Have a Black organization, business, or bank we should profile? Let us know! You can also demonstrate your support by changing your social media profile picture to the #BlackXmas graphic:

What Spreads Faster Than Covid? Vaccination. Our last pointless ideological fight may be over whether the vaccinated are spreaders. Holman W. Jenkins

https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-spreads-faster-than-covid-19-vaccination-distribution-breakthrough-infection-omicron-11638570230?mod=opinion_lead_pos8

It deserves a wow. Some 57% of the human population has received at least one dose of the Covid-19 vaccine, and 45% are fully vaccinated, in less than a year.

This means the vaccine has spread approximately twice as fast as the virus, never mind that the virus itself is an exceptionally fast spreader that organizes its own distribution without help from trained administrators and sub-zero storage.

Add that infection also offers a kind of vaccination, so now two kinds of resistance to Covid-19 have been spreading with unprecedented rapidity through the human population.

Numerous were the complaints about how Delta spoiled the summer even for vaccinated people, but it’s not clear why this was so. Vaccination takes away Covid’s deadliest property, its novelty to the human immune system, turning it into the equivalent of a cold or flu. Nobody lets the prospect of a cold or flu spoil their holiday (though perhaps they should for the sake of their elderly in-laws).

The point is not frivolous. It suggests why, rather than a dark new chapter, the Omicron variant may be our last big wallow in hysteria, from which we will awake slightly red-faced in the morning.

John Eastman is right to resist the January 6 committee The congressional inquiry would be better named a congressional vendetta Roger Kimball

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/john-eastman-right-resist-january-6-committee/

The name of the game Congress is playing with its partisan inquisition is intimidation. John Eastman is right to resist. Every American who cares about our Constitutional rights should support him.

John Eastman, a former member of Donald Trump’s legal team, has just declined, through his attorney, to cooperate with the congressional inquiry into the events of January 6, 2021 at the Capitol.

I think he was right to do so, for several reasons.

In the first place, the congressional inquiry would be better named a congressional vendetta. Its composition is heavily weighted towards Democrats. The committee includes no “ranking members” of the opposition as the rules stipulate, hence the frequent invocation of the “Star Chamber” in descriptions of the inquiry. It is less an investigation than an inquisition.

Given the frankly biased structure of the congressional panel, Eastman, like Steve Bannon before him, was right to decline to testify or provide documents to aid in his own prosecution.

For readers who are a little fuzzy about just who John Eastman is, the relevant fact is that (apart from being a brilliant constitutional lawyer at the storied Claremont Institute), Eastman wrote the now infamous memo, originally a two-pager, later expanded to six pages, in December 2020 outlining various strategies that team Trump might consider in response to the 2020 election.

It is not, as widely reported, a scheme to “overturn” the election. It is an effort to layout various ways in which an election that was widely seen to be corrupt could be lawfully challenged.

The comic cries of climate apocalypse — 50 years of spurious scaremongering By Bjorn Lomborg

https://nypost.com/2021/11/30/the-comic-cries-of-climate-apocalypse-50-years-of-spurious-scaremongering/

The recent UN climate summit in Glasgow was predictably branded our “last chance” to tackle the “climate catastrophe” and “save humanity.” Like many others, US climate envoy John Kerry warned us that we have only nine years left to avert most of “catastrophic” global warming.

But almost every climate summit has been branded the last chance. Setting artificial deadlines to get attention is one of the most common environmental tactics. We have actually been told for the past half-century that time has just about run out.

This message is not only spectacularly wrong but leads to panic and poor policies.

Two years ago, Britain’s Prince Charles announced that we had just 18 months left to fix climate change. This wasn’t his first attempt at deadline-setting. Ten years earlier, he told an audience that he “had calculated that we have just 96 months left to save the world.”

In 2004, a major UK newspaper told us that without drastic action, climate change would destroy civilization by 2020. By that time, it foretold, major European cities would be sunk beneath rising seas, Britain would be plunged into a “Siberian” climate as the Gulf Stream shut down and mega-droughts and famines would lead to widespread rioting and nuclear war. Not quite what happened last year.

And these predictions have been failing for decades. In 1989, the head of the UN’s Environment Program declared we had just three years to “win — or lose — the climate struggle.” In 1982, the UN was predicting planetary “devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust” by the year 2000. Indeed, at the very first UN environment summit in Stockholm in 1972, almost 50 years ago, the organizer and later first UN Environment Program director warned that we had just 10 years to avoid catastrophe.

In 1972, the world was also rocked by the first global environmental scare, the so-called “Limits to Growth” report. The authors predicted with great confidence that most natural resources would run out within a few decades while pollution would overpower humanity. At the time, Time magazine described the future as a desolate world with few gaunt survivors tilling freeway center strips, hoping to raise a subsistence crop. Life magazine expected “urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution” by the mid-1980s.

The scares were, of course, spectacularly misguided on both counts. They got it wrong because they overlooked the greatest resource of all, human ingenuity. We don’t just use up resources but innovate ever-smarter ways of making resources more available. At the same time, technology solves many of the most persistent pollution problems, as did the catalytic converter. This is why air pollution in rich countries has been declining for decades.

Women’s Tennis Has Balls. Does Wall Street? Cowardice and courage on the question of China. Bari Weiss

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/womens-tennis-has-balls-does-wall

China is ruled by an increasingly totalitarian regime that uses technology to spy on its citizens. It is, at this moment, carrying out a genocide against its Uyghur Muslim population. It regularly vanishes people who dare to dissent. And it wants to control the terms of debate, politics and business worldwide.

Having disappeared doctors and scientists who tried to blow the whistle on Covid-19, the Chinese Communist Party has now targeted Peng Shuai, a tennis star who accused a former top Chinese government official of sexual assault. “Even if it is like an egg hitting a rock, or if I am like a moth drawn to the flame, inviting self-destruction, I will tell the truth about you,” she wrote on the social media platform Weibo. Then her message disappeared. And so did she.

These are facts discoverable to any American with an internet connection, which the hedge fund investor Ray Dalio surely has in his Greenwich, Connecticut, mansion.

Smart guy, one imagines, to be trusted with managing $150 billion of other people’s money, as his company Bridgewater does. But when Dalio was asked yesterday on CNBC about China’s human rights record, and how he thinks about it with regard to his investments, he feigned ignorance.

“I can’t be an expert in those types of things,” he told interviewer Andrew Ross Sorkin. “I really have no idea.” He went on to compare China’s government to that of a strict parent, and offered some mush of moral relativism about how the United States does bad things, too. This from a man who wrote a book called “Principles.”

You really should watch the whole thing: