LOONS AND THEIR 'TOONS

[Prof]

Those of you who have glanced at the responses to P. H.’s conviction, whether on Lost Horizons or at Sui Juris Club are certainly not surprised that the true believers are all certain that the Court was wrong in instructing the jury, or that the Court was under the thumb of the IRS, or that the Court was corrupt, or that the jury was simply stupid, or, or, or.

None of these folks ever seem to think to themselves, “Hey, maybe P.H. is wrong, an ill educated idiot, and so forth." Even tho P.H. has lost – all the way to the Supremes – on the civil side and has now been convicted in a criminal proceeding after what seems to have been a very short jury trial, the true believers are still there defending the person and the theory.

Is anyone surprised? These folks are deeply alienated from the fabric of ordinary society. They all seem to live in a fantasy world, where it is possible to drive without a license, avoid real property taxes, and pretend to be non-taxpayers.

Who in their right mind would spend days or hours or even minutes trying to come up with legal theories so that they can escape a traffic ticket? Who would risk job loss by refusing a W-4 form?

Comments, anyone?

[bmielke]

Who in their right mind would spend days or hours or even minutes trying to come up with legal theories so that they can escape a traffic ticket? Who would risk job loss by refusing a W-4 form?

Comments, anyone?

bolding added.

I think you have it right there, they are not normal, stable, sane, really any adjective, they are crazy and to the sane folks out there, their actions make no sense.

[Famspear]

Agreed. There is something deeply troubling about the way these people refuse to face reality. They have created their own imaginary world, taking bits and pieces of reality and trying to relate those pieces with their own imaginary, non-existent, illogical connections.

I seem to remember that a psychiatrist or psychologist who examined Irwin Schiff indicated that there was little likelihood that Schiff would ever improve or snap out of it. For many of these people, there is no amount of reality that will shake them out of their delusion. They are hell-bent on seeing the world in a certain pre-determined way, and their ability to "reality test" the data that comes to them is severely impaired.

Dominant themes run through the writings of many of these people: hatred of government, mistrust of government personnel, conspiracy theorizing, equating taxation with "slavery", and so on.

Another theme that we see in their writings is that they project their own inadequacies on the people they perceive as the "enemy." In other words, in their minds, it is the great majority of the people who are deluded, not the members of their own fringe group. Many of these fringe people exhibit a fervent, almost religious-like faith that they have discovered The Truth and a desire that the majority come around to the fringe belief system.

Unfortunately, for many of these people, neither prison terms nor impoverishment nor seeing their own families destroyed by their own foolishness deters them.

[Prof]

Typical Sui fantasy post:

Today, 12:05 AM
reenie
Supreme Club Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tucson, and Mexico

Re: What is the Underlying Cause of our Economic Demise?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exactly what that gal Marcie did in America: Freedom to Fasism did right!

The judge did storm out of the courtroom. That is because they get $25,000. bounty or merit raise from the IRS for every IRS case they sit on. The IRS will drop them like a hot potato if they don't come in with a jury verdict!

You missed the point about educating the people about this fraud and that they get involved in jury duty. That way it would be 11 for jury nullification and 1 acainst!

[Pottapaug1938]

In a sentence: "my mind is made up; don't confuse me with any facts."

[LPC]

What always amazes me about these clowns is their fervent belief in, and desire to return to, a past of American freedom and economic prosperity that never existed.

Being perpetually angry at reality is a bad way to live a life.

[grixit]

Yeah, a past in which manly men like them could succeed, unfettered by the welfare state or civil rights legislation. They'd be the same people as they are now, but they'd all have great jobs and split level ranch houses. And subserviant wives. And members of minority groups would call them "Sir".

[Judge Roy Bean]

...

Who in their right mind would spend days or hours or even minutes trying to come up with legal theories so that they can escape a traffic ticket? Who would risk job loss by refusing a W-4 form?

Comments, anyone?

Experience tells us these things are cumulative in nature. The seeds usually involve minor run-ins with law enforcement or some facet of the bureaucracy.

Soon, cognitive dissonance sets in and the ego cannot accept the possibility of being wrong. Reinforcement from like-minded fools amplifies the problem.

Toss in some individuals with an entrepreneurial bent and clever ideas who can rationalize illegal behavior to "strike back" at "the system" and here we all are - trying to stamp out widespread idiocy.

[Pottapaug1938]

What always amazes me about these clowns is their fervent belief in, and desire to return to, a past of American freedom and economic prosperity that never existed.

Being perpetually angry at reality is a bad way to live a life.

Some years back, I bought a book entitled "The Good Old Days -- They Were Terrible!" It debunked a lot of myths, about how absolutely wonderful those halcyon days of old were, which are still treated as Holy Writ by the Loons and their Toons.

[Pottapaug1938]

As far as economic prosperity, I don't know, but I have little doubt that most people were freer 100 years ago when the federal government was smaller and most governing was done at the state and local levels.

In general, I'd have to agree with you; but whether or not I do, those days are gone forever. 100 years ago, things like airplanes, telephone and radio were in their infancy. Today, we can call around the world as easily as we call the next town over; and a voyage that would take weeks, 100 years ago, now takes hours -- and that's just a couple of examples.

[Prof]

As far as economic prosperity, I don't know, but I have little doubt that most people were freer 100 years ago when the federal government was smaller and most governing was done at the state and local levels.

In general, I'd have to agree with you; but whether or not I do, those days are gone forever. 100 years ago, things like airplanes, telephone and radio were in their infancy. Today, we can call around the world as easily as we call the next town over; and a voyage that would take weeks, 100 years ago, now takes hours -- and that's just a couple of examples.

What if you were not white, not male, and not well-to-do?

[Evil Squirrel Overlord]

I guess I am at a loss to figure out how I am less free now than in the past.

[Brandybuck]

Dominant themes run through the writings of many of these people: hatred of government, mistrust of government personnel, conspiracy theorizing, equating taxation with "slavery", and so on.

But not all of those make them nutters. Hatred/mistrust of government does not make one a loon. It's a common theme in American culture. Due to our frontier nature, American culture arose in an environment of small and distant government. Some small amount of libertarianism is present in most of us. For some its a distrust of government telling us who we can sleep with, for others it's who we can do business with.

What makes the tax deniers loons are the second two themes: conspiracy theories and taxation hyperbole. The first is confirmation bias run amok. They've become fixated on a reality that does not exist, and will filter facts (conspiracies) and alter language (taxation is slavery) so that their sensory observations match their preconceptions.

Some years back, I bought a book entitled "The Good Old Days -- They Were Terrible!" It debunked a lot of myths, about how absolutely wonderful those halcyon days of old were, which are still treated as Holy Writ by the Loons and their Toons.

Yup. A lot of the loons have a very rosy view of the past. No smallpox, no destitution, no grinding povery, slavery was rare, etc. The Federal government may have been smaller, but state governments oftentimes made up for it. The income tax might not have existed (at least as we know it today), but steep tariffs were common. And while hemp may have been legal, no one smoked it.

There are some good things about the past, but a lot of good things about the present as well. I wouldn't trade my middle class of 2009 for the middle class of 1809 or even 1909.

[wserra]

I guess I am at a loss to figure out how I am less free now than in the past.

You charge more, of course.

[Pottapaug1938]

As far as economic prosperity, I don't know, but I have little doubt that most people were freer 100 years ago when the federal government was smaller and most governing was done at the state and local levels.

In general, I'd have to agree with you; but whether or not I do, those days are gone forever. 100 years ago, things like airplanes, telephone and radio were in their infancy. Today, we can call around the world as easily as we call the next town over; and a voyage that would take weeks, 100 years ago, now takes hours -- and that's just a couple of examples.

What if you were not white, not male, and not well-to-do?

I never said that their freedom was always beneficial. We were "free", for example, to work long hours for whatever wages the bosses were willing to give us, unfettered by minimum wage laws; and "free" to shop at stores where the food was adulterated or of poor quality. Perhaps it would have been better to stress the part of UGA's post discussing how "most governing was done at the state and local levels", since when I made my earlier post I was thinking of some ghost towns in Massachusetts which were cleared away in the 30s for a reservoir.

I also should have included a disclaimer regarding the "economic prosperity" part of his post. My bad.

[webhick]

I guess I am at a loss to figure out how I am less free now than in the past.

Well, for starters, you've lost the freedom to not only buy and sell, but also beat and rape women and children. I'm not saying you would, but I am saying that it's really not on the table anymore.

If you're female, you're now almost expected to get a job and earn a paycheck instead of working your ass off at home keeping house, managing the property, finding inventive ways to stretch every resource at your disposal, and raising the babies fathered by that guy who bought you for a pig at the local fair. Well, the ones that are still alive, that is. Could be worse, I suppose. You bargained cranking out another vaginal hellspawn in exchange for getting your man to stop skipping his weekly bath. Life couldn't get any better!

DAMN YOU EVIL GOVERNMENT OVERLORDS!

[Imalawman]

While I agree, I'm hesitant to also say, "well, because this evil existed, it all was evil and should be ignored". Only a fool would not look at the good and bad in the past and learn from it. I don't think it is wrong to say, "they had this right...we should copy it" just as it is prudent to say, "this was wrong, we should avoid that".

While women had less rights, the familial unit was typically stronger and provided a more stable upbringing. So why can't we say, "let's use the good aspects of the family unit, but add to it our better ways of elevating women (or correcting another shortcoming of the previous year's family)".

Freedom is always subjective and depends on the viewpoint. For instance, while someone might revel in the fact that they have a certain freedom, if another views that as morally wrong, they would view as bringing less freedom and increasing sinful bondage. I part ways with the "looney" crowd in that I refuse to glorify the past, while I part ways with more liberal thinkers when they attempt to debunk aspects of the past simply because there was evil present during those times.

Eh, my 2 cents..if its even worth that...

[Prof]

Black, yellow, brown, child, female, poor were not "freer" from government 100 years ago and that is "most" of the people who were alive then.

[Judge Roy Bean]

I guess I am at a loss to figure out how I am less free now than in the past.

Wow. That's a shockingly ignorant assertion.

"Freedom" needs to be considered with a measure of degrees. Absolutism is a flimsy defense because economic pressure is only a slightly-disguised limiter of freedom that has a tendency to overstep it's purported bounds.

Without expending an inordinate amount of time researching what you may have left in terms of posts here on which one might draw to be more specific, let me give you just three examples:

Your freedom of privacy in your communications and financial affairs.
Your freedom to travel without suspicion and interference.
Your freedom to use your property as you see fit.

If you don't recognize those, you will clearly not understand any other freedoms you've given up.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Unless you were a business owning white male, you lived a pretty darn sh*tty life - and were probably dead by 60 or 65.

That's if you were very lucky; the average life expectancy back then was 46.3 for men, 47.3 for women. If you were black, 33 - and that's if you avoided being lynched (which was happening at a rate of 115 per year).

The average worker made $12.98/week for 59 hours in old timey dollars. Wow...big bucks! That's barely scratching minimum wage by today's standards.

I have to agree with your pa, Skipper: there was nothing good about them ol' days.

Screw 'em - I'm glad they're ancient history.