“The ethnic threat to free speech”

That’s the heading put on today’s article in the AFR by David Leyonhjelm – the Libertarian [!] member of the Senate. Me, I won’t say a thing about any of this, but here is how he starts:

When Labor, the Greens and certain Liberals in western Sydney seats seek to explain their reasons for opposing changes to section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, they mostly refer to the concerns of ethnic, religious and racial minority groups.

Representatives of Armenian, Hellenic, Indian, Chinese and Vietnamese groups have joined Jewish, Lebanese Muslim and Arab groups to oppose any changes apart from procedural, arguing that amending section 18C will unleash a torrent of “hate speech”.

While we occasionally hear half-hearted claims that minorities require special protection from hurt feelings, the main driver of opposition is the political clout of these groups. A dozen or so federal seats are held on margins smaller than the populations of these groups. And in the recent WA state election, certain Muslim leaders openly endorsed the Greens.

And then let me give you the last para as well:

Opposition to changes to 18C is a wake-up call. Australia’s traditional liberal values are under siege like never before. With one side of politics already in full retreat, it is vital the other side steps up to protect those values before it is too late.

Next thing you know, he will start to agitate for us to build a wall across Australia’s north.

Don Surber and me

The other person to have written a book on the election is Don Surber who has today also written a column on We will still Trump Obamacare whose first sentences read:

Reports of Obamacare’s life are premature. Liberals gloated last week when President Trump realized the Freedom Caucus was an immovable object, threw up his hands, and told the House to vote on Ryancare. Up or down. He no longer cared.

At Instapundit the link comes under the heading “Folks, this is fun. I am having the time of my life.”

So let me explain how I look at things myself. Every battle lost by Trump merely retains the status quo. Nothing he wishes to do is contrary to what I would like to see done. He will achieve some of his agenda and not achieve some others. But whatever he doesn’t do would not have been done by Hillary, nor would she have done any of the things that Trump has been able to do. In fact, everything she would have done would only have made things worse. Moreover, no other Republican had the slightest chance of winning the election so without Trump Hillary would have been the president right now. With Trump as president, everything is a net double plus.

As for the books, there is Don Surber’s version and there is mine. His is called Trump the Establishment and mine is The Art of the Impossible. You can get a copy of mine here. Don’s is described below. The main difference is mine is a blog history, which is told as it happens by someone watching the events as they happened. Even when you know the result, the suspense never ends since right to the end you cannot see, given the surrounding media noise, other than through sheer merit how Trump’s eventual election could have happened. His is told as a reflection on what happened from the perspective of someone who already knew who had won. Both are truly interesting ways to review the election and both are by people who really truly wanted to see Trump win and Hillary lose. Both of us have not had the slightest reason to change our judgement on the result.

Trump the Establishment: The Elitists Never Learned in 2016
Authored by Don Surber

After the rousing success of Trump the Press, which lampooned the pundits who missed Trump’s nomination, Don Surber’s readers demanded the story of the 2016 general election. Eager to please his fans and have some fun, Surber agreed to tear into the elitists a second time.

Trump the Establishment uses Surber’s quick wit and deep research to chronicle President Trump’s spectacular rise. Trump’s was an asymmetrical campaign that fooled critics and pleased his supporters.

From Clinton’s questionable activities to the media’s inability to grasp the difference between Trump the celebrity and Trump the CEO, Surber shows how Trump challenged and beat the establishment on his own terms. Voters in thirty states chose to dump the status quo in Washington, and Make America Great Again.

Trump won despite Clinton’s massive campaign war chest. He won despite overwhelmingly negative news coverage. He won despite losing every debate. He won despite a tumultuous personal and financial past, and still, the elitists don’t understand why.

Surber explains why. Just don’t expect him to have any sympathy for the elitists and media personalities left adrift and defeated in Trump’s passing.

And after all, why should he?

Leslie Eastman of Legal Insurrection wrote: “Trump the Establishment summarized many key challenges the campaigning Trump team faced from an openly hostile press, made-up news, rabid progressives, and Clinton-supporting Republicans under Surber’s hallmark titles of hilarity.”

“How is this not front page news at every news organization across the United States?”

This is exactly what the video show: Obama’s Former Asst. Defense Secretary ADMITS Obama Spied on Trump (VIDEO). As the article asks:

How is this not front page news at every news organization across the United States?

Once again President Trump has been proven right when he said that his wires were tapped by President Obama.

We know why it’s not in the news but it’s still a scandal. In fact, the absence of reporting may be a scandal almost as large.

Did people always seem this crazy?

There is always much to read on Quadrant Online and of course in the magazine as well, but the one regular contributor I will always read, and almost always immediately, is Peter Smith. Today he has written something even more remarkable than usual: Delusional, Malevolent or Both? I will give you his first para and the last. Now go the link to read what comes between.

Backwards we go to windmills, then to cultural oblivion, and onwards to terrorising the enemy on the battlefield with our gender-nuanced battalions. Insanity is abroad. Fancy is replacing reality. Subversion and sedition are in the air. . . .

Often, though not always, you find that those who favour windmills, who despise our culture, and who see the military as suitable terrain for social experiments in gender fluidity and feminism, are one and the same. They are of the modern left; the alt-left. They are delusional. Or, are they malevolent; or are they a bit of both? Can you imagine what George Orwell or any self-respecting socialist of not so long ago would have said of them?

Mad as a meat axe the lot of them. Malevolence is in their hearts but irrationality is what drives them on.

Suppose you wanted to understand Donald Trump’s supply-side economic reforms where would you go?

There was this story on the front page of the Financial Review yesterday morning with the heading: Trump reforms ‘not understood’. It begins:

The United States economy is poised to enter a period of sustained higher economic growth on the back of President Donald Trump’s supply side economic reforms, according to two leading US economists who have been tipped to join the US Federal Reserve board.

Should you wish to have some idea of what Trump is trying to do, you might therefore find of interest the endorsement by Professor Art Laffer – the Art Laffer of the Laffer Curve – that he has provided for the third edition of my Free Market Economics.

“This book presents the very embodiment of supply-side economics. At its very core is the entrepreneur trying to work out what to do in a world of deep uncertainty in which the future cannot be known. Crucially, the book is entirely un-Keynesian, restoring Say’s Law to the centre of economic theory, with its focus on value-adding production as the source of demand. If you would like to understand how an economy actually works, this is one of the few places I know of where you can find out.”

Art Laffer is the original supply-side economist. Free Market Economics is indeed one of the few places you can go to find out what supply-side economic theory means in practice and in detail.

ADDITIONAL COMMENT ON THE COMMENTS: Supply-side economics as an approach to understanding how an economy works is different from the how these principles might be applied in any given circumstance. It is not a theory of tax, although, as in Reagan’s time, these principles were part of the effort to get taxes down, where the real point was to transfer spending from the public sector to the private. If all you know about supply-side economics is the Laffer Curve, I’m afraid you actually know very little about the base principles. The central issue is Say’s Law. Unless you understand what the classics meant by Say’s Law, I’m afraid the underlying principles are unknown to you. Art Laffer, however, made Say’s Law the touchstone of his own understanding of supply-side theory. If you are truly interested in understanding these principles, you can either read Mill, or Clay or my own Free Market Economics. If you have another you would like to add to the list, by all means let me know. They hardly exist although there are others, but that is what you need to know.

[My thanks to TMc for directing me to the AFR article.]

Art of the Impossible now in print!

Before I get to the rest, I have had two lovely emails from Catallaxians who have received their copies of The Art of the Impossible, which is more than I can say myself. Now that the books have actually been printed and are being distributed, we are preparing to have the book properly launched into the universe, which will take place in Sydney and Melbourne and perhaps elsewhere. Until then, you can order books from Connor Court here in Australia or from anywhere at all at Amazon and for those who have asked, I will happily sign the books when we meet up next. As a reminder, this was my own take on the nature of the book.

As for the perils of being president, let me begin with something I wrote on Friday about what ought to be the greatest political scandal of our times, the bugging of Trump and his associates by the Obama administration during the election campaign and in the period leading up to the inauguration:

So we shall see if it is still news come Monday, whether the don’t-want-to-know crowd will get their wish and end up not knowing.

Well Monday has come and Monday has gone and so too has the story. It has almost completely vanished, demonstrating as nothing else could, that Trump was almost certainly right about everything he said. If the media and the democrats have backed off and dropped the story, it is only because there is absolutely nothing in it for them.

And also, strangely, mention of the pulling of the anti-Obamacare bill has nearly itself completely disappeared, again because it may not work out all that well for the Democrats. See below:

As Trump says, Obamacare is once again fully owned by the Democrats. He also says he has learned a lot by the process, including, no doubt, whose judgement he can rely on and whose he cannot. As for Obamacare, when the rotting has gone to the fullest extent, there will be another attempt to fix things up. Meanwhile onwards to other issues, of which there are no end. The best thing about Trump may yet be his temperament.

Trump’s winning streak continues

Let me begin with something I wrote on Friday about what ought to be the greatest political scandal of our times, the bugging of Trump and his associates by the Obama administration during the election campaign and in the period leading up to the inauguration:

So we shall see if it is still news come Monday, whether the don’t-want-to-know crowd will get their wish and end up not knowing.

Well Monday has come and gone and so too has the story, demonstrating as nothing else could better show, that Trump was almost certainly dead on about everything he said. If the media and the democrats have backed off and dropped the story, it is only because there is absolutely nothing in it for them.

And also, strangely, mention of the pulling of the anti-Obamacare bill has nearly itself completely disappeared, again because it does not work for the Democrats. See below:

As Trump says, Obamacare is once again owned by the Democrats. He also says he has learned a lot by the process. When the rotting has gone to the fullest extent, there will be another attempt to fix things up. Meanwhile onwards to other issues, of which there are no end. The best thing about Trump may yet be his temperament.