GOP distaste for political warfare.

Arizona has thus thrown a challenge directly into the face of the modern liberal regime. The essence of the liberal regime is that it pretends to be and appears to be “moderate,” “patriotic,” and “lawful,”—all those things that average Americans see as the essence of America—while in reality it is radical, lawless, and anti-American. Even those mainstream conservatives who sense how extreme the ruling liberal orthodoxy really is, don’t want to say so, because that would break down the illusion of moderateness and consensus on which the American Creed rests and replace politics as usual with political warfare.

I'll have to reflect on whether mainstream conservatives are guilty of Mr. Auster's charge. For now, I'll say that the repubs can be counted on to shirk any and all meaningful fights and so the political history of the United States unfolds as though our president were simply Hubert Humphrey with a sun tan rather than a man with a childhood communist mentor; a communist terrorist political crony and ghost writer; a jimjam, nickel-plated, double-barrel, revolving, white-hating, horse’s ass of a “Christian” preacher-mentor; a paper trail as long as silver dime is wide; and a heart that thrills to the call of the muezzin.

Strong message to follow.

"The federal government is waging war on America: do we ignore that fact and continue playing by the rules?" By Lawrence Auster, View from the Right, 7/30/10 (emphasis added).

European Union -- politics over economics.

How fast can you say “limited shelf life” five times in a row?

The dream of a United States of Europe looks increasingly like a nightmare. The project has not worked, because it could not work except by sacrificing the most basic requirements of the modern state: a liberal economy and a liberal polity. In order to create a single economy from radically contrasting components, Europe has sacrificed free-enterprise capitalism to controls, intervention, and swollen spending. In order to create a single state out of incompatible nations, it has sacrificed national democracy to the interests of a new transnational élite.^[1]

The underhanded way in which the Treaty of Lisbon was jammed down European throats is but one of the indicators of the E.U.’s contempt for popular sovereignty. Not that the Europeans care to mount any kind of determined opposition to this -- or to the E.U.’s plan to destroy native culture with massive immigration.

Perish the thought.

No. so long as they get theirs, I don’t see that E.U. (or U.S.) populations care that much about the loss of a liberal polity.

• Hate speech laws? Ho hum.
• A free pass for scurrilous politics? The higher good, Pilgrim.
  
• Massive third-world illegal immigration? Right up there with gravity, Hans.
• Police dereliction of duty? The New Britain, lads.
• Thuggish, ass-kissing, trigger-happy, out-of-control Bobbies? I'm awright.
  
• “Accidental” taser attacks over car insurance? Stuff happens, Reg.
  
• Muslim no-go areas in France? Lighten up, Pierre baby.
  

But the negative consequences of sacrificing free enterprise will get their attention eventually. Greece, though hardly alone, will be an interesting case to see if that country learns the necessary lessons or if its people will choose to stay lip locked with the socialist succubuses and incubuses.^[2]

It’s the underlying affliction of the West in general -- the stupid belief that there can be something for nothing and that no diminution of liberty -- singularly or in the aggregate -- is cause for concern so long as it serves a nice purpose. And no one is discriminated against.

Notes
^[1] "Europe: What Future?" By Dr. Robin Harris, Heritage Foundation Special Report, 2010, p. 21.
^[2] Same-sex demonic carnal relations are ok by me, let me make clear, and demonism is simply one valid lifestyle choice among many.

UPDATE (7/31/10):

Add to bulleted list:

• Police beating of EDL suspect in custody (breaking arm). Boys will be boys.

Back to the Future.

Indians assisted with [the British] Empire because it brought them unprecedented order and civility. Indians were no strangers to outside rulers; for eight centuries before the Raj, the sub-continent had been subjected to the plunder and depravity of the Mughals - Muslim rulers who came from as far west as Turkey. Delhi was razed eight times in that period and great pyramids were constructed with the skulls of its inhabitants.

Because Islam permits the enslavement of non-Muslims, Indians were sold across the Islamic world in such quantities that the international price of slaves collapsed. The Afghan mountain range of the Hindu Khush (which translates as the 'Hindu Slaughter') is named after the huge numbers who died there while being marched to the markets of Arabia and Central Asia.

For all the artistic refinement and opulence of India's past rulers - and their poetry, music, and the magnificence of the Taj Mahal are testament to that - they oversaw a period of general barbarism in which the ordinary Indian was no more than a starving chattel.

The noble Muslim heritage. By God, you just have to love the third world and its ways.

Now here’s the $64 question: “In what way is “modern” Islam different from the Islam of those murderous and inhuman rulers in India so long ago?”

Answer: In no way whatsoever.

Only now Muslims possess a great deal of modern weaponry and explosive technology and the technical knowledge and discipline to maintain (perhaps) and use it.

"Britain has no need to make an apology to India for Empire...." By Nirpal Dhaliwal, Daily Mail, 7/29/10.

H/t: "The Iconoclast."

The Zombie West

[C]owardice and meekness toward colonization by alien primitives are now the defining feature of late Western civilization. . . .

* * * *

. . . There is cosmic madness afoot in the West: an endless, imbecilic atoning for white man's past racism and sexism, imperialism and colonialism, blind to the other races' equal or worse history of murder, racism and all the other isms. It is beyond reason and quite divorced from the will to live, from life energy itself.

Mr. Seiyo thinks there are four possible endings:

• The “self-appointed Redeemers of White Man’s Wickedness” will destroy the West,
• an alternate evil will arise,
• Westerners will abandon the West through emigration, or
• they will resort to internal migration.

I would prefer to read that "waking up" was one of the options on his list of possible endings but who can argue with its absence?

Mr. Seiyo’s is an excellent essay with a superb summary of the sins of Western regimes against their peoples.

"From Meccania To Atlantis - Part 17: Shotgun Marriage In Europe." By Takuan Seiyo, Brussels Journal, 7/23/10.

The leftist Prime Directive.

Nothing has been more integral to leftists’ intellectual work than their extraordinary effort to cover up the true nature of totalitarianism. These efforts occur because of a willful desire to conceal, a willful blindness to the truth, an insufficient intellectual ability, or mental illness.

Consider a New York Times reporter at the inception of one of the most monstrous regimes in human history and also what every anti-war activist scumbag in the United States refused even to contemplate as the inevitable outcome of the U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam -- and the Congressional betrayal of the anticommunist cause:

Sydny Schanberg of the New York Times completely failed to apprehend the nature of the Khmer Rouge and his leftist compatriots baying for American withdrawal from Vietnam

In the New York Times, Sydney Schanberg reported from Cambodia that "it is difficult to imagine how [Cambodian] lives could be anything but better with the Americans gone." Mr. Schanberg added that "it would be tendentious to forecast [genocide] as a national policy under a Communist government once the war is over."

A year later, Mr. Schanberg was awarded a Pulitzer Prize, though not for tendentiousness.

All in all, America's withdrawal from Southeast Asia resulted in the killing of an estimated 165,000 South Vietnamese in so-called re-education camps; the mass exodus of one million boat people, a quarter of whom died at sea; the mass murder, estimated at 100,000, of Laos's Hmong people; and the killing of somewhere between one million and two million Cambodians.

I contemplate the history of the 20th century merely up to 1945 and conclude that no sane, decent person can do otherwise than entertain complete skepticism when claims are made for the benign nature of government power. The burden of proof is massively on any advocate of greater government power to show that the benefit to be achieved is worth the danger to life and liberty involved.

But the left is indifferent to the warnings derived from the last century. What matters to the leftist is whether or not some marginal Good Thing will result from the proposed increase in government control. In short, what matters to the left is expediency.

No doubt the left was amazed by what happened in Cambodia. “How could this be?!”

But here is the definition of a liberal -- A liberal is someone who is always surprised when he finds chewing gum under the seat.

"Surely man is different from this stark evidence before me of indifference and contempt! No. I will only believe what my eyes tell me here if my investigations unearth 10,000 instances of this behavior."

See the AP photograph in Mr. Stephens’s article. Even what you see there isn’t enough to open leftists eyes.

It never is.

No.

What the left proposes never has a downside. Leftist pipe dreams are safe at any speed.

"From WikiLeaks to the Killing Fields. Liberals contemplate withdrawal from Afghanistan, heedless of the consequences." By Bret Stephens, Wall Street Journal, 7/27/10 (edits by Mr. Stephens).

The leftist con.

Amazing, these 'moderns' know all the faults of the old religions and monarchies etc. Yet they have nothing to say about the 20th caveman century brouht to us by the various versions of 'government' . Ill take a King or Queen any day over these sickos in charge now.^[1]

Excellent point. Leftists must suppress the truth about the butchery and economic devastation of totalitarians and all others who worshiped at the altar of the state in the last century. (Hint: lying and hypocrisy raised to a state-sponsored art form; slavery; the degradation of citizens in their daily lives; terror; spying and suspicion; new aristocracies of psychopaths, outcasts, malcontents and deviants; assassination; torture; secret police; subversion; theft; barbed wire; national decline.)^[2]

The leftist engine of fault detection never fails to roar and spew jets of blue flame a mile long when the faults of Western regimes and traditional ways are up for scrutiny. Flank speed, Mr. Spock! Yes. Bring on the electron microscopes, political chromatographs, and robotic microdissectors so that we may know the full depravity of our ancestors and our sane, comfortable, productive, entertaining, healthy, secure lives.

Let the dangers of statism be proposed for scrutiny, however, and that mighty engine of detection dies kerpow and spins down to 10 tons of cold steel in three seconds flat. The hypervigilant apologists for inhuman "religions," greasy little revolutions, and tawdry kleptocracies -- who show suuuuuch perspicacity and ingenuity in trashing their own ancestors -- suddenly act like stroke victims trying to remember breakfast.

"While the Proctotron is down for routine scheduled maintenance, Comrades, check out the History Channel and its 450,793 programs about those Nazis -- homicidal, Christian, ethnic nationalist, European, white capitalists every last mother’s son. Of course, that would be right wing homicidal, Christian, ethnic nationalist, European, white capitalists!" (Wink, wink.)

KMA!

Notes

^[1] Comment by barry at "The Quislings of the Anglo-Right." By Stanislav Mishin, American Thinker, Mat Rodina, 7/16/10.

^[2] The economic madness of statists in the democratic socialist regimes of Europe and the United States must similarly be finessed with the aid of . . . dare I say it . . . a complicit press.

Tricky one.

At Crusader Rabbit.

Socialism in a nutshell.

Consider the commonly encountered idea that

Socialism is a great idea, but human nature is so perverse, selfish, and horrible, that nobody has figured out how to do it right yet.

Andy Duncan did and makes these observations about socialism:^[1]

• it makes economic calculation impossible,
• it attempts to substitute social engineering where human have for eons been able to organize themselves for survival without it,
  
• it can't be made to work by just one more attempt to get it right with a new, honed, spreadsheeted approach,
  
• its core rests on “hideously destructive” envy, and
  
• it inevitably entails truncheon, minefields and barbed wire.

On the latter point, socialists never level with us on the question, “Who will command the state’s (greatly augmented) coercive apparatus?” The answer is inherent in the consideration of why socialist regimes fail:

1. worthy idealists are corrupted by power (Lord Acton),
   
2. worthy idealists lose power to conniving thugs (Friedrich Hayek), and
3. the people who are drawn to socialism are thugs plain and simple who hide their intent to found murderous regimes based on envy and parasitism.

Duncan writes of the prescience of a Eugen Richter, a 19th-century German parliamentarian. Richter subscribed to the “thugs ab initio” view of socialists and in a novel (Pictures of the Socialistic Future) published in 1891 predicted many of the ghastly features of the socialist scams of the next century:

Richter gets virtually all of his major predictions right: the mass exodus after socialism is introduced, the subsequent emigration ban coupled with a death penalty for transgression, rationing and the increase of police state powers, the breakup of the family through welfare imposition, larger standing armies, allocated compulsory work duties, internal passports, and all of the other usual miserable flotsam and jetsam of a typical full-blooded socialist regime, with all of the initial ideals forgotten and certainly never achieved, as the worst elements of society scramble to be King of the Prison Steps to control everyone else from the top.

So much then for a Workers' Paradise on Earth.^[2]

On the issue of the character of socialists, when one contemplates the mad flight from free markets into the thicket of suffocating, demeaning, enslaving regulation, the assault on freedom of speech, and the contempt for the Constitution and our tradition of liberty -- all leftist phenomena -- is it not Richter who got it right? To fight now for socialism in the light of the last century’s horrific and well known experience with socialism is to identify oneself as a dishonest partisan of a system that entails inevitable economic failure and enormous risk of totalitarian political excess, even if you believe only men of good will are champions of socialism.

Nice people are not guarantors of liberty, no matter how majestic the "idea a la mode." Only the rule of law and our free institutions come close to that but, as we know, these are never, ever considerations when socialists are in full cry after some "noble" goal. Does this ten millionth lurch into the political or economic thicket infringe liberty in any way? What kind of a question is that? Or as Nancy Pelosi would ask, "Are you serious?!"

At this late date, masking one’s true character and exerting huge effort to hide the true nature of socialism are essential to any socialist worthy of the name.

Enter Barack Hussein Obama, 44th U.S. president:

Mentor: Frank Marshall Davis, undercover communist operative.

Trusted colleague, political crony, and ghost writer: William Ayers, communist terrorist.

What could go wrong?

Notes
^[1] "The Writing on the Berlin Wall: Pictures of the Socialistic Future." By Andy Duncan, Mises Daily, 7/20/10.
^[2] Id.

Bill Clinton -- Muslim tool.

The duplicitous left makes much of the supposed WMD pretext for George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq. But it was and is silent about Clinton’s calculated and contrived intervention in Bosnia in 1995.

The Muslim police commander of Srebrenica says the late President of Bosnia, Alija Izetbegovic, in his presence, “quoted Bill Clinton as saying that 5,000 dead Muslims would be sufficient to provide the political basis for an American-led intervention on the side of the Muslims, which both of them wanted.”^[1]

What followed was a phony drama where Muslims were free to depart from Srebrenica, which they contrived to deliver to the Bosnian Serbs for theatrical purposes from the outset.

An Amsterdam academic reported that the U.S. in roughly the period 1992-96, actively transported arms, Iranian-trained mujahidin, and al Qaida combatants, among which were two of the hijackers in the later 9/11 attack, as well as the man who helped plan 9/11, Khaled Sheik Mohammed. No doubt the latter three, in deciding to kill 3,000+ innocent American civilians in New York, had to overcome their powerful feelings of gratitude to the U.S. for its assistance in Bosnia, which included the Defense Intelligence Agency’s arranging for gaps in AWAC coverage to facilitate the delivery of the arms and mujahidin in U.S. military aircraft.

I kid you not. Talk about Bill being a cabana boy for the Muslims! Now Clinton’s wife is Secretary of State and works for Barack O’Leary Obama. I shudder to think what these two think “protecting vital U.S. interests” means.

As Mr. Trifkovic writes elsewhere,

Islam is a collective psychosis seeking to become global, and any attempt to abet such madness is to become part of the madness oneself.^[2]

Which is exactly what Mr. Clinton did . . . and President Obama is doing now. They abandoned their own people and became part of that madness.

On the issue of the alleged Srebrenica “genocide” itself Srdja Trifkovic says the 8,000 Muslim murders number is not an estimate but a “political construct” and the number of victims just doesn’t add up, though the Serbs did commit war crimes. Mass graves there contained war dead from both sides, as was true everywhere.

However, a French general had this to say about Muslim conduct before the Bosnian Serbs took over Srebrenica:

French General Philippe Morillon, the UNPROFOR commander who first called international attention to the [Muslim] Srebrenica enclave, is adamant that the crimes committed by those Muslim soldiers made the Serbs’ desire for revenge inevitable. He testified at The Hague Tribunal on February 12, 2004, that the Muslim commander in Srebrenica, Naser Oric, “engaged in attacks during Orthodox holidays and destroyed villages, massacring all the inhabitants. This created a degree of hatred that was quite extraordinary in the region.”

Asked by the ICTY [Yugoslav War Crimes Tribunal at The Hague] prosecutor how Oric treated his Serb prisoners, General Morillon, who knew him well, replied that “Naser Oric was a warlord who reigned by terror in his area and over the population itself”: “According to my recollection, he didn’t even look for an excuse. It was simply a statement: One can’t be bothered with prisoners.”

Another U.N. official stated that the Croatian army engaged in the mass murder of all Serbs in Krajina in the summer of 1995.

Clearly a more complicated situation than “Bosnian Serbs commit genocide in Srebrenica.” Yet, it was in this very tangled mess that Clinton recklessly involved the U.S. -- on the side of the Muslims.

Fellow citizens! Do we grasp the reality of how far our political leaders and system have been compromised by Saudi money?

Notes
^[1] "The Genocide Myth. The Uses and Abuses of ‘Srebrenica’." By Srdja Trifkovic, Alternative Right, 7/8/10 (emphasis added). All other material in this post are from this article but for what is taken from the article cited in the footnote below.
^[2] "The Meaning of the Myth. Srbrenica, Islam, and Western Decadence." By Srdja Trifkovic, Alternative Right, 7/14/10.

Budget gimmicks and revolutionary lies.

Finally, the government has used budget tricks and gimmicks to put off real fiscal reform and hide the actual costs of out-of-control spending. The outcome is that we end up with more spending, more deficits and more debt.

Budget gimmicks, however, have consequences beyond letting lawmakers get away with spending money. With a limited budget, policymakers - like nearly everyone else in the world - must prioritize spending. They must choose the best policies to adopt based on available funds and forgo other projects. [However, w]hen legislators manipulate numbers in order to fund programs that otherwise might not pass muster, they are not obligated to show that the programs serve genuine social or financial policy objectives.^[1]

In short, the highly intelligent, motivated, educated, experienced, principled people we send to Congress engage in day-in-and-day-out intellectual dishonesty on spending . . . and have done so for decades. With the disastrous consequences that are plain now. Our Greek moment is just down the road according to the deficit commission.

It’s like the failure to defend the border, the evisceration of our manufacturing capacity, the favoring of illegal foreign workers over citizen workers, the pandering to Muslims, and the deliberate crippling of our energy economy. One simply cannot grasp that political leaders who say they are patriots in fact support and defend federal action that manifestly undermines our security, economic well being, and constitutional structure.

In the 1930s, the U.S. Supreme Court completely did a Dukes of Hazard triple U-turn on 140+ years of prior Supreme Court interpretation of the Commerce Clause that has made possible this extra-constitutional “legal” regime that did much to create a federal government that knows no limits to its power.

It can with impunity nationalize a major U.S. corporation, take over 1/6 of the economy under the banner of socialized medicine, and even sponsor ads on weight loss or sex discussion with your kids. Good luck finding authorization for any of that in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.

The blatantly spurious “emanations and penumbras” grounds of Roe v. Wade similarly snatched power from the states regarding an issue that was exactly the kind of contentious issue that should have been fought out in individual states according to the original constitutional scheme. But these revolutionary judicial acts -- in their essence lies -- are ignored by the grifters, time servers, and opportunists who benefit from their effect. Name me the state chief justice or bar association leader who has raised his or her voice to keep these betrayals before the people in the last 50 years.

And the people are complicit too. Which makes the moral failure of the judicial officials who are, certainly at the federal level, immune from the pressure of electoral politics all that much more reprehensible. (Justice Thomas is one magnificent exception.)

As with our legal protections, so with our fiscal health. American political leaders undermine them with lies and gimmicks.

And the GOP in Bush's time was no exception.

Since the end of the Cold War, the GOP and the Democratic Party have increasingly morphed into a statist corporatist oligarchy that champions open borders and free trade. The result has been the gradual dissolution of America. Our borders are a bleeding sore; uncontrolled immigration is rampant; our industrial base is dwindling; factories and jobs are outsourced overseas; the middle- and working-classes are shrinking; government spending is out of control; the national debt is exploding; and special interests dominate Washington. Traditional America is dying.^[2]

Ours is a culture of corruption and decay. And we may just be one congressional election away from an irreversible political shift founded on vote fraud and amnesty for a vast pool of undocumented Democrat voters who’ll support socialism and the Democrat party now in the firm grip of leftist extremists.

Notes
^[1] "To deal with debt, we have to stop lying about it." By Veronique de Rugy, Washington Times, 7/16/10.
^[2] "The conservative ban on Michael Savage." By Jeffrey T. Kuhner, Washington Times, 7/15/10.

New World Order (1917 version).

Bones uncovered on the outskirts of the Pacific port of Vladivostok belong to hundreds of victims of Stalinist purges executed by the NKVD secret police, municipal officials and experts said Thursday.

City authorities said last month that at least 495 skeletons — many with head gunshot wounds — were among 3.5 tons of bones that had been unearthed from a mass grave by workmen building a road.

Just one place outside one city in the Soviet Union. One place.

3.5 tons of bones from people executed by the Soviet secret police.

This was the reality of the regime that the Paul Robesons and Lillian Hellmans supported. But only a part of it.

"3.5 Tons of Bones Declared Victims of Stalin Purges." By Reuters, Moscow Times, 7/16/10 (emphasis added).

The great missed opportunity with blacks.

Elizabeth Wright shines a spotlight on the implications of black elites’ late 20th-century choice to follow the path of “integration.” That choice was simply one to pursue political power with the aid of white beneficence -- and insufferable^[1] white condescension, let it be said:

Blacks once had some of the best teachers and mentors steering them in the right direction, that of economics. However, the opponents among them, who strove only for "social justice" and "equality," the theme so beloved by whites, were determined that recalcitrant entrepreneurial types would not mess up their game plan. . . . The elites were not dumb. They surmised that the strategy of "civil rights" would lead more quickly to greater power than they could acquire at a slower economic pace.

This is the key to why so much terrible stuff befell blacks and ultimately befell the country. The elites who ran such organizations as the NAACP cared nothing about the overall health or long-term welfare of the group, but only about how they might take short cuts to power via the beneficence of whites.

With the help of their white compatriots they managed to turn what was essentially an economic problem to be solved into a moral crusade. And the typical white ate it up. . . .

* * * *

. . . It was much more gratifying to point to the "immorality" of whites who initially refused to forego their own individual rights at the behest of the black cause.^[2]

This turning away from self sufficiency to embrace dependency has led to dismal black school performance and wastelands where there ought to be vibrant black communities, among other evils, all necessarily "explained" by:

• Thelegacyofslavery and
  
• Institutionalracism.

Which doctrines to be defended and propounded with religious zeal.

The correct approach, says Ms. Wright, would be to have required blacks to produce through their own efforts and imagination instead of depending on what goodies whites, in their infinite beneficence, allowed to fall off the table. Instead we ended up with blacks “led” by clowns and a legal regime at odds with a Constitution that “forbids the government from removing the rights of one set of citizens (white property owners) in order to exalt the rights of another.”^[3]

The benchmarks of progress along the entrepreneurial/self-sufficiency path are plain for all to see. There is or there isn't a well-run convenience store, dry cleaning establishment, machine shop, or architectural firm in town. "Social justice," on the other hand, is a concept for morons and guarantees oceans of ink will be spilled by intellectual lightweights pondering imponderables like Hamlet Yorick's skull. Ditto, "civil rights" which is a concept with no substantive meaning and nothing more than a club to use on some poor white schlub who was lucky enough to get a jury of his peers.

Such is the debased nature of our current tiered racial system that is only a slightly less virulent inversion of the one it replaced. It comes saturated with hypocrisy, the elevation of clowns and devils, and fanatic hostility to common sense.

There was another way and, like fish in water, it's hard for us to keep in mind that we exist in a strange miasma indeed. Elizabeth Wright reminds us of that other way.

Notes
^[1] Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna points out that it’s liberals who “regard black people as unable to restrain themselves or control their emotions when they feel slighted” and who believe that blacks “cannot accomplish what white people accomplish unless they are granted lowered standards, affirmative action, and minority set-asides.”
^[2] "The Civil Rights Myth. Integration & the End of Black Self-Reliance." By Elizabeth Wright, Issues and Views, 5/29/10.
^[3] Id.

Chinese espionage in the U.S.

The result of China's 15-year [espionage] effort has been "the largest military buildup the world has witnessed since the end of the Cold War," says Richard Fisher, a China specialist for the International Assessment and Strategy Center (IASC), a Virginia-based think tank.

"How China Steals U.S. Military Secrets." By Simon Cooper, Popular Mechanics, 7/10/10.

Current Economic Dilemma 101.

Additionally, I will say that recent macroeconomic developments have been easy to understand. People bought homes they couldn't afford with the blessing of government officials. This was encouraged by the likes of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and a Federal Reserve in love with a cheap-credit policy. Now, it is all being made worse by increasing regulations, higher taxes, fiscal interventions, and unneeded bailouts.

Meanwhile, I will continue to repeat that all people will be made better off in the long run by lowering taxes, easing regulations, stopping fiscal-policy interventions, and not giving the state the power to print fiat money.

"Economics Is … Easy." By Sterling T. Terrell, Ludwig von Mises Institute, 7/14/10.