"Wherefore We must interrupt a silence which it would be criminal to prolong, that We may point out...as they really are, men who are badly disguised." Pope St. Pius X, September 8, 1907, Pascendi Dominici Gregis

Monday, October 16, 2017

100th Anniversary of the Founding of the Militia Immaculatae

Three days after the miracle of the sun in Fatima, St. Maximilian Kolbe founded the Militia Immaculatae, a response at least in part the bold processions of masons the saint witnessed during his time in Rome. The militia is dedicated to the defeat of the heresies spread by these enemies of Christ, taking the Blessed Virgin Mary as their patron and coming from all walks of life.
The spotless Virgin, vanquisher of all heresies, will not retreat before the enemy who raises his head against Her. When She finds faithful servants who obey Her command, She will win new victories, greater than we can ever imagine.
If you happen to be unaware of the heresies which enemies from within and without the Church are propagating, this recent video by Fr. Michael Rodriguez will make it abundantly clear.

If you are interested in joining the Knights in order to hasten the defeat of our spiritual enemies, please visit https://militia-immaculatae.info/en/the-100th-anniversary-of-the-militia-immaculatae/

Thursday, October 12, 2017

The Myth of Conservatism

Let us be perfectly honest with ourselves. Conservatism does not exist, neither are there any conservatives. Those true adherents to the values conservatism once embodied have long since left to more rigorous locals, such as libertarianism or radical traditionalism, leaving nothing but a "blank check company," in the parlance of modern finance, that can be cashed against the portion of the voting populace whose moral compass tends in the right direction, but who do not exactly check their surroundings to see if their compass might be off or broken.

In the United States, we have seen the following series of liberal adjustments to society transpire. Only propertied men can vote > All men can vote > Men and women can vote > Yet, only men serve in the front-line military > Men and women serve in the front-line military > Men and women and the homosexuals among them who don't admit to it can serve in the military > Men and women and homosexuals can serve in the military openly > Men, women, homosexuals can serve in the military but not men/women who physically alter themselves to appear more like the other sex.

Each one of these positions has once been the lock-step "conservative" position, yet the starting principle is not compatible with where we are today. A social order based on ownership rights to personal achievement (capitalism), traditional morality and decentralization has long since passed. We are living in the aftermath of the aftermath. Eight of the ten planks of the Communist Manifesto are public policy. Decentralization consists of letting the states administer federally instituted programs through block grants of funds from federal income tax. Conservatism no longer exists. This is the liberals' paradise.

The progression above is just an example, so if it isn't written to fit your liking similar progressions are legion. And the more salient point is this: Don't think we're at the end of the progression! If conservatives had been disabused of this illusion at the first impasse, it's unlikely our enemies would have progressed to today. If even "conservatives" realize one thing, it should be that there is no limit to the lengths to which our opponents will go to distort reality to fit their goals and impose that image on us. Our point is the most effective way to combat this mentally is wholesale rejection, even if we rely on incrementalism as a political afterthought to take potshots in the meantime. Make no doubt this is what the liberals are doing! We must never lose touch with the universality of the values we embrace, even if we are not absolutists by heart.

Seemingly the only explanation for holding on to any sense of effective, institutional conservatism has become as a holding tank for the less-than-radical liberal. "Conservatism" is where the lesser liberals go when their "rationality" or "conscience" finally catches up with them. They are allowed a watered-down version of the current liberal social order, a successful presidential candidate now and then, even control over Congress and various public agencies. But if they were to ever shake off their daze and take a cold, hard look in the conservative mirror (as above), and get with it, they would suddenly find their access to these levers of power shut off. And not by the liberals, but by the other "conservatives" themselves!

When we approach our current social arrangement with a 'hermeneutic of continuity,' the idea that current liberal innovations ought to be interpreted as in keeping with a more conservative past, we lose any power that true conservatism holds. We will not find ourselves out of this mess by availing ourselves of the politically viable walk-backs the broader liberal culture allows for us. This article is a wake-up call. Your conservatism has passed the expiration date. And it's not clear it will be back in stock any time soon.

Monday, October 9, 2017

The Easiest Way to Be On God's Side

It is a fairly common misrepresentation when interpreting historical events to attribute to the seeming victor, that "God was on their side." But, of course, this is laughable on the face of it. Even those that incorrectly disbelieve in God will admit one of the defining attributes of God is that He is all good.

But, if God is definitely all good, and as we also know, He is the Creator of all things, then He is always the impetus behind any victory of the good over evil in history. God wasn't on the [human] victor's side. It was the human victor who was, at least temporarily, on God's side.

This is a key distinction, because it forces the historian to realize that it takes effort to recognize on which side of an issue is truly to be found the good, and then remain on the good side even after an apparent, temporal victory. We are beholden to God. God does not serve man's purposes. Man serves God's purposes.

And do not get confused when you see Our Lord, Jesus, apparently serving other men. This He did, as He was both man and God. Jesus manifested to us how we are to live according to God's law in relation to God and to other men. This is similar to His being baptized by John the Baptist, even if by John's own admission it should've been the other way around, because Our Lord was made man to show us how to be men. And to show that, as men, we are to be obedient to God in all things even unto death, by receiving the sacrament of baptism for example.

So, if you don't know how to figure out if you are on God's side, and you're not sure how to stay there, there is one saint's example you should surely follow. An Ignatian retreat is the easiest, sure-fire way to do so.

Tuesday, October 3, 2017

Free Catalonia - Which Way Sovereignty?

Much is currently being written in the blogosphere concerning the incipient secession movement in Catalonia. Our own feelings in support of such secession movements should come as a surprise to no one. What we would like to point out is exactly where secession stands within the greater context of Western history.

This is what "Spain" looked like at the height of the Middle Ages. Typical historians paint this as a grim period of superstition and theocratic, Catholic authoritarianism. Yet, as revisionists get their hands on this cartoonish version of history, we are realizing that it was precisely in this time and place that many of the modern institutions of self-determination necessarily first arose. While the collection of kingdoms, Catalonia among them, that made up medieval "Spain" were engaged in ending the Islamic oppression of the south by driving the Moors back into Africa, the Italian City-States were becoming the first great centers of Capitalism, true private ownership, and entrepreneurialism, inventing for the first time double-entry bookkeeping so essential to high finance. Switzerland, today among the foremost models of economic stability and sophistication, was being cobbled together as a collection of polyglot jurisdictions that escaped the orbit of their more powerful neighbors, largely due to a slew of technicalities that could follow only from the multi-tiered structure that was Medieval sovereignty.

Indeed, it was a fractured political order, but a unified philosophy of Catholic truth that gave rise to science, capitalism and rule of law. For all those claims about Catholic authoritarianism, history sure does demonstrate the opposite. Spain itself became home to some of the most eminent of the Thomistic scholars, the intellectual masters of the time (and all time, if the modern world would learn some humility). So much so, Murray Rothbard in his book An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought traces the roots of the Austrian School of Economics to the Spanish Scholastics.

In fact, it was only with the rise of the so-called "nationalist" movements and their pretenses towards democracy that we see the authoritarian tendency in Europe first come into full-bloom. Notice that while the nation-states we have today, such as Spain and Italy, are certainly centralized states, they hardly constitute single nations. Catalonia's separate culture and language is but one of a multitude of examples of a true national identity being smothered under the artifice of the modern "nation"-state.

The truth of history is much harder for the anti-Catholic to accept. As the power of the Church languished, we see the inevitable rise of truly centralized political authoritarianism in place of God during the French Revolution, Nazism, Communism, and the present EU-style pan-political Europeanism, each, as is all too often the case, promulgated under the guise of democracy or rule of the people.

We must do better to remember the true origin of the social institutions which give rise to our freedom and wealth. This is the treasure trove of Western civilization.

Monday, October 2, 2017

Science Presupposes Divinity

It is non-trivial that the Catholic West gave birth to modern science. Even a casual glance over history proves this to be true on the face of it, but quite simply, without an ordering force, how can there be any order? Why suppose that an experiment holding all things constant should yield self-same results for all times and places? This requires an abiding, non-arbitrary nature to the universe, something few cultures would ever be able to concretize. In fact, it is only with the advent of Thomistic philosophy that we see for the first time a sense that the rational maps perfectly with the supernatural. That is to say, with Thomism we have a sense that the ultimate source of being is entirely congruent with man's ability to logically represent it. Just to be clear this means that with enough conscientiousness man is able to perceive the ordering principle at particular times and places. This does not imply omniscience on man's part, only ability to perceive substantial parts of a reality which is indubitably true.

This ability to pierce the veil analytically, so to speak, to understand that certain ordering principles hold true throughout a reality that otherwise constantly gives the appearance of change is fruitful, at first. Economically and scientifically it leads us to a dominion over the created world that few of earlier centuries could've conceived even after God's command to "fill the earth, and subdue it." The entire system of economic calculation and its accompanying rise in economic standards of living since the Industrial Revolution would not be possible otherwise.

Man can continue to recognize this gift of science for what it is, return to his Catholic roots and bring his relatively new found economic progress into proper submission to its very origin, God, as outlined above.

However, the path man has chosen instead is to forget God and see science as a tool of his own creation. God will not immediately interfere with our mistake, however we will also suffer the consequences. We can see, again as above, man's ability to perceive the inner workings of reality as a necessary component of our effort to grow in knowledge and love of the divine truth, which is fixed and prior to our own existence. But if we fail to see this necessary anteriority of divinity, then we may purposely use our ability to manipulate the material world around us to destroy the very congruence of man's logical perception with ultimate reality. It seems we are living on a one-way street. If man goes so far to use his ability to manipulate the material realm that he makes changes to his own physical makeup, he runs the risk of literally loosing the pre-created congruence between his mind and the governing forces of the universe. Man could loose his humanity, his rationality, and once lost, could never regain it. This of course is an extreme, but feasible scenario, and we should use it as an instructive to discern already the changes in man's methods of living that are stifling of his higher capacities.

Science, then, has absolute limits. Else, it will destroy itself. Man that learns to manipulate his own makeup to such an extent that he destroys the aspect of his mind that is in congruence with wider reality will render science incomprehensible and sentence man to a future truly inhumane.

Science, to remain science, must be subject to the divine.

Saturday, September 30, 2017

Make Yourself Anti-Fragile

All of Nassim Taleb's books are worth a read, but one of his stand out original ideas is that of anti-fragility.

We are all very comfortable with the notion of fragility. Something is fragile if it can't take very much disturbance or stress. There's nothing wrong with this, per se, if the conditions are right. Nassim notes, and we all know it from personal experience, technological developments along with the poor policy prescriptions endemic to modern social life have conspired to make things that used to be a source of stability, careers, money, savings, etc. increasingly more unreliable.

Many people feel they are the mercy of their economic situation, tied down and too afraid to make adjustments in the short term that can lead to an increase in long-term happiness.

If you are smart, you can make disruptions in your economic life work for you. This is the idea behind anti-fragility, where you benefit from increased disruption. While it's worth the work to figure out what actions would make you the most anti-fragile, we'll give you a few examples.

Pay off all your debt. Nassim explains at length, but debt makes you as fragile as can be. Having a (small or large) pile of cash sitting around takes it one step further.

Build up that after-tax brokerage account. Create a diversified and income-oriented portfolio. While everyone's situation is different and you should consult your advisor before making any decisions, having a portfolio oriented to income can give you a cushion if things go wrong. And you want to be diversified from stocks to preferred stocks to bonds from US to Europe to Asia to Australia, South America and elsewhere, to insulate you from any single crisis.

Buy an acre in the country. Worse comes to worse you can live on it and grow your own food. In Texas, this move if done correctly has the potential to nearly eliminate your property taxes.

You'd be surprised just how creative you can be when you'd rather be working, but due to circumstances beyond your control you are not. Instead of worry, make those periods in your life a time to reflect, recreate, read and ratchet up your future success. Find opportunities you didn't have time to find before. This is Anti-fragility.

Does it take adjustment? Yes. But the results can be absolutely priceless.

Hey, you can even read Nassim's book.

Friday, September 29, 2017

When America Had A Spirit, It Was Can-Do

Houston, Texas may be the energy capital of the world, but for all those pipelines filled with oil and gas, it sure wouldn't hurt to build a few that could carry excess water out of central Houston to the bay during Hurricane Harvey.

Something reminds us that the Americans of an earlier day, those that built the Panama Canal, the Hoover Dam, the Empire State Building and the Great Northern Railway - the only transcontinental railroad by the way built completely with private funds and land acquired privately - would have started the planning for those new pipelines on the very first day the sun poked out from behind Harvey's last trailing cloud.

No, for those not familiar with the aftermath in Houston there is talk of spraying everyone with pesticide, buying out and demolishing flooded neighborhoods and "hope" that in a year or two new home-buyers will forget the flooding ever happened and return to inundated neighborhoods. Mind you, these are in some cases thrice flooded neighborhoods, because while Harvey has been the most severe flooding event, Houston has seen similar catastrophes within the last 17 years.

What we really need is a pipeline company funded by private capital and paid for by fees from HOAs and developers, just like other water utility developments, to build sufficient drainage capacity to make flood-risk in Houston a non-factor. Thanks to geography this should be imminently doable, with all the major reservoirs uphill from the appropriate outlet.

Don't expect this to happen. At least not without massive disruption in leadership. All we can hear from Houston's democrat mayor is talk about FEMA funds, increased property taxes and a 'flood' Czar. That Americans don't think it's strange to use terminology from Imperial Russia to refer to their public officials these days is unsettling. The red-tape surrounding such a project is probably unimaginable.

What President Trump ought to be doing, instead of arguing with football players and bothering with North Korea is knocking some lesser political heads together in this country. After all, to complete the circle of irony, that's what we see in Russia today. In case Americans forgot, this is what politics looked like before the faceless technocrats of the deep-state stripped the President of all of his power except use of his twitter account:


So Russia can apparently hold disaster drills that involve somewhere between one-third and one-half of the entire Russian population - that's 40 to 60 million people! - without a hitch on a regular basis, but Houston cannot call for an evacuation because the last time they did during Hurricane Rita it went so poorly that people died waiting in the stalled traffic on the way out of the city. Those old jokes about poor economic conditions in the Soviet Union? Well, for Americans today, they're no longer jokes.

Read more about America's Can-Do Spirit.

Thursday, September 28, 2017

Splitting Society

If you are a regular visitor to ActualAnarchy, you've got a lot of this figured out. Our job as we see it is to help you take your analysis one step further. We are always looking for an opportunity to be at the cutting edge of social analysis. It's the only way we have a chance to defeat our, right now, much larger opponents.

Today, we're going to highlight one of the psychological tactics of the enemies of mankind, and how it explains many things you see happening around you today. We're also going to explain how this tactic furthers the future goals of these same people. And then we're going to explain some very simple ways to overcome it.

Wikipedia lends us a definition for splitting in psychology. It is "the failure in a person's thinking to bring together the dichotomy of both positive and negative qualities of the self and others into a cohesive, realistic whole. It is a common defense mechanism used by many people." This mechanism is the trademark of the novice thinker, always thinking in binary terms, and not able to keep his analysis in context.

What do we mean by keeping your analysis contextual? Well the same type of statement can have different ultimate meanings depending on who said it. In this case, it is the 'who' that is the context, or the circumstances surrounding the statement in question. For example, after the events of September 11, 2001, then President Bush made the statement, 'You are either with us or you are with the terrorists.' Well, no, as a traditional Catholic who believes in a natural social order à la Austrian economics I neither concur with your state-based approach to fending off destroyers of property, the state just happening to be one of the biggest perpetrators of such crimes, nor am I with fanatical Muslim terrorists, or false-flag intelligence agency operatives or both, depending on which theory of the events of that fateful day you accept.

In another context, such a dichotomy has real meaning, though. Our Lord, whose charisma President Bush often tried to co-opt for his own purposes, also said "He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth." Our Lord, as the very measure of truth, the logos made flesh, is able to sustain the reality of such a statement. Indeed, if I were to take sides against Our Lord, I would have failed as a man. President Bush, himself a sinner and one with confused political ideas at that, is subject to limits of authority as imposed by natural law (viz., God) and subject to the frailty of human understanding. In the context of Our Lord, we can accept the reality of such a binary statement. In the later context, we must stand in the middle, allowing that men, while they can perceive some truths, are neither infallible nor omniscient.

This standing in the middle, reserving judgement, not making rash determinations is exactly what your enemies are hoping you don't do. See, if they can just trip you up, get you to assume something is always good or always bad, like assuming President Bush and the federal government always act on what's best for the American people, or even that they never do, then they've got you. They know who you are and how you will react. This is what is what is called 'splitting' in psychology. And the most cunning of your enemies will use this information to manipulate you. 

It takes some effort to stand in the middle, to sort out the good and the bad of any situation or person, but this is what we are obligated to as thinkers, and morally as Catholics.

With this in mind, perhaps it is a little easier to understand the extremes we are starting to see in the present American political discourse. Seemingly out of nowhere we are seeing the most radical, long-discredited right-wing ideologues appear alongside their all too long-lived and accommodated left-wing, 'social justice' counterparts. As we highlighted before, neither one of these minuscule segments of the population hold much coin with the American public. Yet, they are being directed by the media to control a plurality of the political discourse. This constant cultural fracas is designed to stress you out, overwhelm your rational abilities, and get you to respond with defensive, over-emotional splitting. Just takes sides, because it is too intellectually demanding to sort it all out.

The problem is, it's not designed to be intellectually sort-able. Both extremes, right-wing and left-wing, find their ultimate support in the state, more particularly the deep-state whose tentacles help posture the media in favor of highlighting the conflict between these radicals. Intellectually, to win we must recognize this splitting tactic for what it is and ignore it. This can also be hard to do, especially when it is being combined with  distraction techniques, the most recent being the kneeling controversy in the NFL.

Ok, so this is all meant just to get us to give up our critical thinking and rashly pick a side. But why? What's the end game? We'll just let Albert Pike speak for himself.

We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil.

Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilisation, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view.

It really is a spiritual battle. If the current powers that be get what they want, we are going to see a "most bloody" clash between the SJW, ultra-left wing, with an increasingly resurgent, semi-Christian, but morally bankrupt right-wing. And you will pick a side, just because it will be too hard to say both sides are wrong, and the true Christian religion, Catholicism, so in need of strict adherence is long-lost. (Or is it?)

Some are even falling in this trap with Trump. Yes, Trump makes valid points or puts forth semi-decent proposals. But we also see at least an equal amount of backtracking and posturing, which makes for extremely effective plausible deniability. 'He's trying his best, it's just everyone is against him.' Perhaps. But perhaps not. Maybe he's in on it. Maybe he's not. Remember, avoid assuming all one or all the other.

To avoid splitting, it is best to lead a moral life. St. Thomas Aquinas and other saints witness that this is the only path towards intellectual clarity. There are a lot of smart bad people, who only sound convincing and whose ideas ultimately do a disservice to mankind. If you think about it, vice itself is a radical adherence to a superficial feeling of 'correctness' about some short-term path of action that completely undermines our long-term happiness. Sounds a lot like splitting to me. And removing sources of guilt in your life will free up intellectual capacity for the real battles ahead.

And if you would like to be a more nuanced thinker, we couldn't recommend more highly Chris Matthew Sciabarra's book Total Freedom: Toward A Dialectical Libertarianism. More than anything, this book will teach you to think in ways you were never taught before, but wish you had been. Even if you have no interest in libertarianism, this book is equally about "dialectics." Dialectics gets a bad wrap in internet circles, often smeared as the Hegelian 'thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis.' While this is part of it, dialectics is really "the art of context keeping" as Sciabarra puts it, and can be used even more effectively for good as ill. Take a look at the book and order a copy. It's worth it for your sanity.

Tuesday, September 26, 2017


A Hundred Years of Fatima.

And Ten Years of Summorum Pontificum.


We reminisce back to our own trailer in anticipation:

Monday, September 25, 2017

The Real Power-Struggle In The West Since The 'Enlightenment'

There are some mistakes in this Alex Jones video. Masonry has always been on the wrong side of history. Just like any organization, there are all sorts of people, good and bad, in it, but Cardinal Rodriguez has detailed its long conspiracy against civilization itself, the Popes have condemned it, and joining remains an ex-communicable offense. The correct pronunciation is not 'Angelican' as in the video, but 'Anglican,' as in the Church of England. That it is an Anglican church makes the entire spectacle all the more clear. We see fully the trajectory of the revolution against Church, civilization and natural law since the unjustly maligned Middle Ages. Jesus established his One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. The Church of England and other protestants separated themselves, challenging the notion of a singular moral authority established by God. Freemasony in turn challenged the need for any Church whatsoever, while Satanism calls into question the very existence of morality. Thus in this video you have summarized all in one place the efforts undermining civilization in a Catholic Church that is now Anglican, where freemasonry occupies the altar and satanists carry out their proceedings. This is the history of the power-struggle in the Western world since the so-called Enlightenment.

By the way the correction Alex references of Pope Francis can be found here. Its signatories notably includes Bp. Fellay of the Society of Saint Pius X.

The battle is real. You must choose sides. And the minute you demonstrate your full awareness of what is going on, you must be prepared for the consequences.

These books are referenced above. The first is by Cardinal Rodriguez of Chile.

Saturday, September 23, 2017

With All Due Respect

Finally, a correction to some wayward statements of Pope Francis. The entirety of the document explaining the correction is found here. The signatories notably, perhaps, include Bp. Fellay of the Society of Saint Pius X and Fr. Linus Clovis whose video we posted here.

We should have liked to provide an excerpt here. Despite some intellectual reservations, we will respect the wishes of the authors of the correction to retain copyright and direct you as above to their own website.

In case there was any doubt...

Vatican II was just a start. The freemasons have infiltrated the Church, and they will attempt to use the empty remains of Her former material glory for their own ends.

See this:


Our Lady warned us. She appeared in 1599 to Mother Mariana in Quito Ecuador and told her the masons would take over the governments of the West and work to abolish marriage, way before masonry even came into the public consciousness. This is known as the apparition of Our Lady of Good Success. She also appeared in 1846 to two shepherd children to warn that the Church, particularly Rome, was in grave danger.

Remember this, when you watch ambiguities emanating from Rome.

Do not give into despair. The enemy can only pretend success by way of lies. There is only one victor for all eternity. Our Lord is both God and man, fully God and fully man, fully victorious and fully triumphant, along with His spouse forever and ever.

Christus vincit! Christus regnat! Christus imperat!

Cardinal Rodriguez of Chile has provided the details is his book, "The Mystery of Freemasonry Unveiled." You can order by clicking below.

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

The Moral Imperative of Price Gouging

With two major hurricanes passing through and various local TV stations proclaiming otherwise, it is a good time to explain why the phenomenon of dramatically rising prices during events such as these, often labelled 'price gouging' is necessary, just and serves the greater good.

Be advised, just like other good things such as the medicinal use of marijuana for instance, it may not be legal in your particular jurisdiction. Make your decisions accordingly.

That aside, we begin by making clear the truth. When a hurricane causes the need for hundreds of thousands of Floridians to evacuate to, let's use as an example, Augusta, Georgia, it is true that the supply of hotel rooms in Augusta at that time is fixed. In other words, there will either be enough hotel rooms already constructed and operating to host the evacuees and any existing guests or there will not be at the rental prices prevailing up until the hurricane. If there are 100,000 families headed towards Augusta to find a place to stay, but only a total of 25,000 available rooms for rent, then you are going to have 75,000 families without a place to stay - no matter what. The question is not whether we have to ration the available rooms somehow. The question is what method are we going to use to determine who gets a room and who doesn't.

If price gouging is made illegal by local authorities and enforced, then the hotel rooms will generally be distributed on a first come, first serve basis. The first 25,000 families arriving in Augusta will rent the rooms, the later 75,000 will have to look elsewhere or go without. So, the hotel rooms will go to those with the best access to information, those who are quickest to react, those who can most easily leave their work on a moment's notice, and those with the quickest transportation, not necessarily those in greatest need or least able to afford hotels. How is this morally superior to rationing based on price? There is no clear argument that it is. Furthermore, there are reasons why an increasing price, even dramatically, is a morally superior alternative to this outcome.

Remember, the first 25,000 families to make it to Augusta get the hotel rooms in absence of "price gouging." But why should they get the hotel rooms? After all, they were the best prepared. They are in a position to drive further away from the affected area if necessary to find a cheaper place to stay. The hotel rooms might better go to those who were just barely able to get out in time, those who arrive later. The rate of supply chain disruption increases as one approaches the natural disaster in time, so those arriving later would have a harder time if they don't find a hotel room in Augusta. How are we going to be sure there are any hotel rooms saved for those that arrive later if prices don't increase? Also, how we going to drive out any renters that are already in the area for reasons other than evacuation if the hotel can't increase its prices?

This brings us to another point. The semi-clever intellectual will say, 'Then we just need to pass a law to make a certain percentage of hotel rooms illegal to rent for a short time only, so that they can be allowed back on to the market, in a day or so once the disaster is impending.'

Okay. Fine. Which hotel rooms (the nice ones with the in-room spa and kitchen facilities)? What percentage? 100%? 56.7%? How long will they be off market? What if the hurricane changes path? The entire reason why prices exist in the first place, and the cost of everything is not legislated, is because knowledge is decentralized and ever changing. Entrepreneurs have proven, by way of profits, they are best suited at gathering this dispersed information and adjusting to market demand effectively. It doesn't mean they're perfect. They're just about a hundred times better at it than legislators and semi-clever intellectuals.

Moreover, we shouldn't impugn the intentions of these entrepreneurs. After all, they already are risking their capital in projects meant to serve a public purpose. During a hurricane, the regular supply chain and means of communication can become disrupted. It might be easy to know what the prevailing price would be in normal conditions, but if these conditions breakdown, entrepreneurs must go back to a more fundamental role of price discovery. If a gas station owner earnestly thinking he has the last remaining supply of gas in a hundred square miles charges $20/gallon, this, for reasons we have already brought to light, is a morally just way to ration the supply. He is also justly rewarded for providing a valuable, limited resource in a time of greatest need. If this same gas station owner is mistaken, and the gas station down the street is only charging $5/gallon, he will also be punished by consumers who notice the other gas station.

But sometimes a prevailing price of $20/gallon might be necessary to alter the remaining functional supply chains. A gas supply truck that normally runs his supply from a refinery in Atlanta to Athens, Georgia might require a dramatic price change like this before it becomes profitable for him to alter his normal route and supply to the area with the greater need. These are extreme examples of course to make the point. Modern supply chains may make adjustments more effectively and at lower price differentials, but this again is a testament to effective entrepreneurs who deserve to be remunerated accordingly. At the end of the day prices are a crucial decentralized form of communication. Like the scents that ants put down so that other ants can follow the same path to food, prices are a decentralized way of communicating which path of production and supply is most desired for entrepreneurs to take.

NB: There are even more reasons why "price gouging" is just and serves the greater good.

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

What Does Catholic Capitalism Look Like?

While we have the historical examples of the Italian city states where capitalism first arose, today one need look no further than monarchical Monaco, which has no income taxes and is one of four (or five or six depending on how you count) remaining states where the official religion is Roman Catholicism. And while we're on the topic, Lichtenstein and Andorra fit a similar bill.

Imagine a world of secure property rights, non-fiat currencies, rule of law, beauty and charm, little Monaco's everywhere. This is what a Catholic political order would look like today.

And don't just take our word for it. Get Thomas Wood's eminent treatise today.

Saturday, September 9, 2017

Re: Is Distributative Justice The Quickest Route to Communism?

The following response to our original article (found here) is published with the author's permission but without attribution as requested. We publish this primarily to indicate our original article was an attempt to put certain ideas forward and to demonstrate concretely that we remain open to all valid correction.

“With more time passed, I still find the distinction McCall admits between that of distributive and commutative justice inadmissible. A series of objections have raised themselves in my mind during the time since our discussion. I will attempt to lay those down cogently here.

I start with the most fundamental objection. “In the beginning was the Word (logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

We see here that there is ultimately no distinction between God himself, the logic or laws that govern the universe, the full and correct abstract concepts which represent those laws in the human heart and mind, viz., “word(s),” and the son of God, the word or law made flesh, who perfectly as both human and God embodied those laws.”

It is true that there is not distinction between God and His own understanding.
However we NEED to understand Analogy, as it is the keystone of Aristotelian and Thomistic Metaphysics (and so of Thomistic Theology), that is, that things which may be in a certain way the same are at the same time NOT the same (or identical) but are in a certain way different, i.e. that they are distinct.

The ordering of the universe can exists in 3 ways, namely, Eminently, Substantially, and intentionally.
i. Eminently: This is mode of existence which all the perfections we see in created things have in the mind of God. They exist him in an ultimately ineffable way.
a. We know they are in him because he is their source, and Nemo dat quod non habet.
b. Also, He possesses the Fullness of all being, and so cannot be said to lack any perfection we find in the created world.
c. And existing in God in this way they are not distinct from God himself.
ii. Substantially: I do not mean here that they exist as their own substances, floating around as platonic ideals, by "substantially" [it is] mean[t] as existing in a substance, constituting it in its being, making it to be the way it is.
iii. Intentionally: When we, created minds look at the universe, study it, come to a knowledge of it through our senses and understanding, we possess in our minds concepts corresponding to the forms/ordering which exists in the universe/natures, and ultimately has its source in the mind of God.

N.B. These three CANNOT be all called identical; they are vastly different.
a. The perfects which in God are not distinct, exist distinctly in creatures. This is because they now exist by a different mode of being than when they are in God. They are, in creatures, limited. Here is an analogy: Do not think that the argument hinges on it, it is meant to illustrate… A thing cannot be both blue and red in the same way at the same time, Yet these perfections must exist in some way in God, again he is their source, possessing the fullness of being from which these two perfections proceed. But in God the inability of these two things to be at the same time in the same thing in the same way, is transcended (no we cant and don’t totally comprehend how, this is why I say it
is ineffable).

Yet obviously we would not argue that there is no distinction in color because the idea corresponding to them in the mind of God are in God identical with each other because identical with His Being.

This ordering in God is Identical to God

This ordering in creatures is created, existing as an element constituting the thing in its being, giving it its end and nature, thus dictating, an compelling the creature to act in a certain way.

This ordering in the minds of rational creatures is also created, existing as a concept, that is as an accident residing in the passive intellect of the Understanding agent, there as a product of the activity of the intellect and the action of the given reality on the mind via the senses.

“Thus if God is so, as we know him to be. If he is perfectly and simply constituted such that He will admit of no distinctions between Himself, His laws, the proper representation of those laws and His son who embodied in all perfection and cogency the forgoing three, then justice itself which is based entirely on the same must admit of no distinctions if it is to be properly and fully understood.”

 As said above there is a distinction between God and the proper representation of the ordering of the universe.

Also, there is a better understanding of the second person that needs to be had here. While we do refer to Christ as the Word, He is not simply the understanding of God.
A. The basis for this name is the following train of thought:

The son is the "Generated" of God.
God is a spirirt.
A spirit is said to generate/conceive by means of thought: intellection.
What is generated/conceived is a concept or word, thus we speak of Christ as the word of God.
B. The key notion to remember in understanding the Holy Trinity is that In God all things areone in the same except where there is opposition of relation.
o So the divine nature is common to all three as well as all that flows from it, His powers, etc.
o God's knowledge and understanding, based on the divine nature are common to all three, and so not exclusive to the second person.
o Another thing to take note of is that God does not use “concepts” as such to think or understand at all, He knows all by knowing himself who is the cause of all. Christ is not simply the concept of God.

 If your basis for denying distinctions in justice is based on the fact that in God all things are one, then why do you admit distinctions in any two "laws"; which are all part of the ordering logos in the mind of God? For example, between justice, and physics, and metaphysics. (Even between Justice, and, healthy and, me, and, you? All exist in the mind of God.)

One passing comment, even if a metaphysical certitude regarding the juistice of an action is not always possible, does not mean that there are no grounds for distinctions in justice. Justice is not math, but like most of reality (according to the perennial philosophy) is analogous and admits of degrees. [It appears] you are also lacking a correct grasp on the nature of authority and the rights accompanying it.

Don't stop there! Continue your studies with St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa...

Thursday, August 24, 2017

A Moment's Notice

None of reality belongs to us, and we are fully subject to it. The sense of autonomy we have is out of all proportion. Our ability to understand small, isolated chains of causation gives us delusions of grandeur. A sense of freedom is valuable, but only in the sense of granting us a proper barrier against others' own ill-fated designs on ourselves. I think the defining characteristic of the modern disease is our attempt to apply our sense of autonomy to reality instead of our fellow human beings. We both self-destruct and give ourselves inadvertently over to the designs of our would-be masters in the same act. This accounts for both the increasing claims of 'freedom' accompanied with a more totalitarian culture. The cycle must reverse. We must happily submit ourselves to reality, and slowly throw off the burden of man's artificial designs.

Saturday, August 19, 2017

They'll Leave This Guy's Statue Standing

The United States is being maneuvered into a simulacrum of civil strife between the most extreme elements of right-wing fascists and left-wing socialists, neither of which hold any real coin with the American public. We are also being maneuvered into a third world war, as the flare up in North Korea and the possible impending invalidation of our deal with Iran indicate.

This is part of Albert Pike's vision for the three world wars needed to bring in the reign of Lucifer via a new anti-Catholic world order. Pike accurately described in a letter dated 1871 the story line for World Wars I & II to the chief Italian revolutionist at the time, Giuseppe Mazzini.

Pike then predicted a third world war which he said “must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the ‘agentur’ of the ‘Illuminati’ between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World.”

He continued: “The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Muslim Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other.
“Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion.

We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil.

“Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilisation, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view."

This plan also called for kicking the Papacy out of Rome. What is striking as well is where Pike predicted the Pope would end up after his eviction:

"[He] will be gathered, after expulsions on expulsions, by the Slavic autocrat, who will affect to render him great honors. [Catholicism will] then try to reconstitute itself as before the expulsion of Rome; The Pope... being near death in Russia, the imperial autocrat will prostrate himself at his feet, and the nations practicing orthodoxy until then, that is, the schismatic religion of the East, will [adopt] Ancient Roman Catholicism, vomited from Italy."

 Of course, Pike is not the only one playing four-dimensional chess, as it were. We also have the words from Our Lady of Fatima in 1913 that this plan of the adepts of Satan will ultimately fail. "But in the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, Russia will be converted, and a certain period of peace will be granted to the world."

As the Americans say, 'buckle your seat belts.' Really, it's time for some penance, conversion and the Rosary.

Sunday, July 30, 2017

Have You Seen This Yet?

These people are satanists. That's why they've gutted the Catholic Church. They want to kick the Pope out of Rome. They would have already if there were a real Pope. And if they could they would wipe Russia off the face of the map. They already tried once with communism.

"To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays. If My requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be annihilated. In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me, and she will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world."

....Is it starting to make sense??

Wednesday, July 26, 2017

Make Every Error Into A Partial Affirmation of the Truth

We have searched for the most accurate description of the strange political twilight that has seemed to emerge since the inauguration of Trump as president. While somewhat vocally radically conservative, the Trump administration has nevertheless given us more posturing than effect. And while we do our best to hope that Trump remains a potential agent for change, we refused to be fooled by our enemies again.

In their latest podcast Novus Ordo Watch gives us the words for which we have searched in their own comments on a video we posted here. The basic concept is that the enemies of truth, both political and spiritual, dare not bring their agenda fully into the open right away. Instead they vary the speed of implementation. They begin with very small deviations from truth and proper order, accustoming us to a certain pace of change, which they describe as inevitable or even 'progressive.' Once we are accustomed to change in general, they vary the pace. The leaders which preside over the most aggressive change are hailed as the most progressive, and often a certain social resistance builds in the population as under the Obama administration. Then a new 'conservative' leader slows down the rate of change, and even undoes some but not all of the most aggressive changes from the prior progressive leader. This 'conservative' is really no such thing, as he is also a progressive if judged by the standards of where society started. Too often the social reaction against the changes is placated.

Trump demonstrates himself so far as one of these 'conservative' consolidators of the new progressive order. Case in point: Under Clinton, it was debated whether homosexuals should be allowed in the military. His "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy was a step towards loosening standards, allowing homosexuals to serve as long as they were not open about their spiritual malady. Today, this issue is no longer part of  the debate, as Obama has made open homosexuality acceptable. Now under Trump we see the debate has moved so far left, we are debating whether so-called "transgendered" people, people who openly mutilate themselves in order to portray a different sexuality from their birth, should be allowed in the military.

Savvy political scientists call this 'moving the Overton window.' We like NovusOrdoWatch's phrasing better. This is all about making every error into a partial affirmation of the truth.

As long as we accept a partial standard of justice, we will leave our enemies room to say 'Well, this isn't that evil. It could be worse.' By this logic then do we proceed in an ever worse direction, since still it could be even worse. There is no substitute then for a culture based on the full and absolute truth of God, as embodied in a non-apostatized Catholic worldview.

Monday, July 24, 2017

Is Distributative Justice The Quickest Route to Communism?

ADDED 9/23/2017 : Please see the rebuttal to this article here and why we likely misunderstood the true sense of 'distributive justice.'

The following comments upon the first chapter of To Build the City of God by Brian McCall.

I find the distinction McCall admits between that of distributive and commutative justice inadmissible. A series of objections have raised themselves in my mind. I will attempt to lay those down cogently here.

I start with the most fundamental objection. “In the beginning was the Word (logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

We see here that there is ultimately no distinction between God himself, the logic or laws that govern the universe, the full and correct abstract concepts which represent those laws in the human heart and mind, viz., “word(s),” and the son of God, the word or law made flesh, who perfectly as both human and God embodied those laws.

Thus if God is so, as we know him to be. If he is perfectly and simply constituted such that He will admit of no distinctions between Himself, His laws, the proper representation of those laws and His son who embodied in all perfection and cogency the forgoing three, then justice itself which is based entirely on the same must admit of no distinctions if it is to be properly and fully understood.

Yes, the human mind, which McCall admits is “weakened by the effects of the Fall” may allow for a distinction between the norms of commutative justice and the particular distribution of goods that inherently follows from such norms, but that does not mean any such distinction resides in the proper notion of justice as such, since perfect justice based on perfect logic will not admit its constitutive parts to contradict one another. Taken from this more perfect perspective, the distinction between commutative and distributive justice is a distinction representing no actual difference in reality (‘a distinction with no difference’).

A possible objection to this is the example of the barons who unjustly withhold grain from their serfs during a famine. You argued in this situation it would be just for the king to force the barons to provide their grain to the serfs. Let us put aside for the moment a discussion over whether such an arrangement of things corresponds ultimately to the dictates of commutative justice or not. Let us stipulate for the sake of the example that it does. Thus, one says, aha, look here, we have a situation where the dictates of commutative justice (those who currently have, up to this point in time, rightful use of their possessions) and the dictates of distributive justice (those who now should have rightful possession of the goods in question after the advent of the famine) seem to contradict one another. Fair enough, let us go ahead and admit to the possibility that such a situation might exist. Here the mere human encounters an epistemological problem. How does one determine with sufficient certainty that a.) a famine exists that the serfs did not have a direct hand in creating themselves, b.) the barons, who would in most cases see it in even their self-interest to keep their serfs alive, do not have a legitimate higher reason for withholding the grain c.) the King, who is so convinced of the injustice of this situation, is not simply taking away the barons’ grain in order to establish precedent that weakens the independence of his rightful aristocratic competition in the long run, especially if he is not willing to lead by the example of providing the serfs with his own grain for the time being d.)  the peasants who may or may not have a direct role in bringing about the famine will not learn to work less than they should because they will see the barons’ surplus is always something to be openly taken if their sloth leads to crisis.

No single human arbiter, especially if taken from the forgoing parties, is likely to have sufficient information and clarity of thought to see through the myriad of contentions to determine with confidence that the norms of commutative justice do not correspond to the norms of distributive justice for the whole of society in this situation. And even if this arbiter could come to a confident judgment, it is another question entirely how exactly to re-arrange resources so as to rectify the deficiency between the two, overlooking that it will yet take even more resources to accomplish this rearrangement. Sure, in the abstract it is easy to say the barons should give their grain to the serfs. But, how much? At what rate? For how long? If, as we said, commutative justice has been perfectly served up to this time, then it seems most reasonable to assume that the two-fold combination of a lack of human omniscience and the presumptive unity of justice would render any second-guessing of whether justice has been served mute. It would seem more reasonable to assume the distribution of goods remains just, and God has endowed each owner of the goods in question the ability to judge via his conscience on how best to use those goods, since every human participant retains knowledge unique to himself and his situation and the ultimate responsibility he is to serve. The owner of goods will have to answer to God for their distribution, but not to his fellow man who is not a disinterested party.

Furthermore, these are not empty objections. Let me give but one example. A baron, as wise as the magi that brought gifts to our Lord, uses his knowledge of astronomy to understand that the sun has just hit a solar minimum and forecasts that harvests will fail for the next ten years. He rightfully withholds his grain in order to ensure his knights and he will have sufficient food for the next ten years, during which it is extremely likely the neighboring kingdoms will invade due to their own short-sightedness in this matter. Thus, the kingdom on which the serfs depend for their protection will not disintegrate completely if the grain is withheld. And while the serfs may barely survive, eating rotten squirrels and roots, some of them even dying, this is still better than the fate they would have under a victorious invading army, which would happily kill them all.

The other barons of the realm, not nearly as sophisticated as this baron, nevertheless take his example to heart, and perhaps for short-sighted selfish or copy-cat motivations alone also withhold their grain from the serfs. The king has long resented the barons since shortly after his election as king when the barons threatened to never vote for his offspring to inherit the throne because of their disapproval of the king’s choice to marry a princess from a neighboring enemy kingdom. The king knows little about astronomy, and resentment has built in his heart since that time, so he is in no mood to listen even to the wise baron. Or, even if he did listen, he might suspect it as some sort of trick. He sees a chance to weaken the barons’ future independence. If the king can strip the barons of their grain on the pretext of any crisis, maybe those crotchety barons will think twice before they refuse to elect his offspring. And so, the king forces the barons to empty their granaries and within the first two years of famine, all the grain is exhausted, the kingdom disintegrates taken over by the neighboring kingdoms and the serfs are slaughtered.

Let us go back to the start, where we stipulated that the barons having all the remaining grain, at least until the occurrence of the famine, corresponded to the dictates of commutative justice. If this is the case, then it follows the barons are barons for a reason and the serfs are serfs for a reason. The barons are in their position rightfully because of some quality they have, a greater amount of virtue, an ability to see the long range consequences of their actions more clearly, something of this sort however one chooses to phrase it. The serfs are similarly weaker; they are more prone to fits of unjust anger and vengeful jealousy. What good does it do to have such a properly ordered system, if the moment there is a crisis such as a famine which must be met with the most consummate wisdom, those who were rightly in a position of superiority prior to the crisis find themselves stripped of the appurtenance of that superiority at the very time when the skillful management of resources is needed most!

Thus, I cannot buy into a distinction between commutative and distributive justice. It seems all of society’s effort ought to go towards ensuring the integrity of the former, and the later will correspondingly find itself properly ordered as well.

ADDED 9/23/2017 : Please see the rebuttal to this article here and why we likely misunderstood the true sense of 'distributive justice.'
And don't stop there! Continue your studies with St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa...

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

What Does This Russian Street Sign Mean?

We found this street sign in Moscow while using one of the common street viewer websites. We're not sure if it means Russians consider car washes to be a universal right or alien abductions are rather common in Moscow.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

Time to Test the Trump

Image result for test the trump
666 or A-ok? Remains to be seen.
- - -
At the present time it is unclear whether the promises of the Trump administration hold any merit or not. There is no need to repeat a tirade about the silliness of our current predicament, which shows for now no signs of change. The Trump administration's greatest accomplishment to date seems to be getting even CNN to join "the great" - but pointless if only rhetoric - "meme wars."

While we remain agnostic as to the ultimate righteousness of Trump himself, and it may be likely that he does as well, we retain a lurking suspicion that the Trump Presidency will ultimately manifest its ulterior motives in the form of an economic renewal that is finally implemented after favorable mid-term elections, but only on the basis of a new monetary order of which Trump will appear the father.

But, again, we remain ultimately agnostic because we believe the Trump administration and the accompanying ideological movements, possibly like Russia in another vein, remains merely a vehicle, a potential, if you will - as in the Scholastic or Thomistic sense, that has yet to be fully actualized. As such, merely a source of power, the movement behind the Trump phenomenon remains a unwritten book.

It is time for conservatives to write that book. I believe that the Trump administration, faced with a type of crisis that requires a Presidential response will force its hand, possibly in the right direction.

I think most conservatives will admit that the liberal segment of the populace by and large controls the centralized levers of power, which still, the internet not withstanding, retain the greatest stranglehold over our country. The universities and public schools, with their hands in our pocket for our tax dollars are but one example. Thus, we have very little to lose, and a small window with the Trump administration in which to act which may be rapidly dwindling.

Something along the lines of what we envision, though this is also just an example, is a successful Texas secession movement. Yes, even many so-called 'conservatives' would voice opposition to such a movement, but it nevertheless has precisely the appeal of the Trump phenomenon, at least during the election, of a conservative ideal no longer beholden to the existent power structures, but willing to rearrange them to the greater benefit of conservative ideals, and thus humanity, particularly the American people, itself.

We have outlined such a movement not so long ago. But now seems the time to act. IF the Trump presidency is presented with such a crisis, say the secession of a conservative state of the union, he will be forced either to:

- prove his conservative bonafides, and look favorably on such a development

- show that he is merely a shill as was Obama and every other president since at least Kennedy for the globalist interests

An important note is that Trump has demonstrated consummate skill in talking a good game, but delivering less than expected. Whatever this ultra-conservative crisis leverage point would be, and we are open to suggestions, it must be persistent and push Trump into a corner that he has to exit.

Our larger point is that the temptation for conservatives is to go back to our proverbial sleep as the reliable warrior of Trump takes on the evil forces that have threatened us until now. This may prove the gravest mistake, as we must, as the left does during their reign, create a catalyst for the Trump phenomenon to realize its potential, rather than remain merely the possibility of change as it is now.