The First Good Explanation of the European Union

The EU: Economically and Morally Peverse

An Interview With Hans-Herman Hoppe in the Polish weekly Najwyższy Czas!

What is your assessment of contemporary Western Europe, and in particular the EU?

All major political parties in Western Europe, regardless of their different names and party programs, are nowadays committed to the same fundamental idea of democratic socialism. They use democratic elections to legitimize the taxing of productive people for the benefit of unproductive people. They tax people, who have earned their income and accumulated their wealth by producing goods or services purchased voluntarily by consumers (and of course especially the ‘rich’ among those), and they then re-distribute the confiscated loot to themselves, i.e., the democratic State that they control or hope to control, and their various political friends, supporters, and potential voters.

They do not call this policy by its right name: punishing the productive and rewarding the unproductive, of course. That doesn’t sound particularly attractive. Instead, they tap into the always popular sentiment of envy and claim to tax the few ‘rich’ to support the many ‘poor.’ In truth, however, with their policy they make more and more productive people poor and a steadily increasing number of unproductive people rich.

But what about the EU?

Looking at the EU, the picture becomes even worse. The EU is the first step on the way toward the creation of a European Super-State, and ultimately of a one-world government, dominated by the USA and its central bank, the FED. From its very beginnings, and despite all high-sounding political proclamations to the contrary, the EU was never about free trade and free competition. For that, you don’t need tens of thousands of pages of rules and regulations! Rather, the central purpose of the EU, supported all-along by the USA, was always the weakening in particular of Germany as Europe’s economic powerhouse. To facilitate this, Germany was sent on a seemingly never-ending ‘guilt trip’ and thus pressured to transfer increasingly larger parts of its already limited (vis-à-vis the USA) sovereignty to the EU in Brussels. Especially noteworthy in this regard: Germany’s giving up its monetary sovereignty and abandoning its traditionally ‘strong’ currency, the DM, in favor of a ‘weak’ Euro, issued by a European Central Bank (ECB) composed overwhelmingly of politically connected central bankers from traditionally ‘weak’ currency countries.

The EU, then, is characterized by three main features: First: The harmonization of the tax- and regulation structure across all member states, so as to reduce economic competition and especially tax-competition between different countries and make all countries equally uncompetitive.

Second: On top of the economic and moral perversity within each country of punishing the productive and subsidizing the unproductive, another layer of international income- and wealth-redistribution is added: of punishing economically better performing countries like Germany and the countries of northern Europe and rewarding economically worse performing countries (mostly of southern Europe) and thus successively rendering the economic performance of all countries equally worse.

And third, of increasing importance especially during the last decade: In order to overcome the rising resistance, in many countries, against the steadily increasing transfer of national sovereignty to Brussels, the EU is on a crusade to erode, and ultimately destroy, all national identities and all social and cultural cohesion. The idea of a nation and of different national and regional identities is ridiculed, and multi-culturalism is hailed instead as an unquestionable “good.” As well, in promoting the award of legal privileges and of “special protection” to everyone, except white, heterosexual men, and especially married family men (who are portrayed as historic ‘oppressors’ owing compensation to everyone else as their historic ‘victims’) – euphemistically called “anti-discrimination” or “affirmative action” policy – the natural social order is systematically undermined. Normality is punished, and abnormity and deviance is rewarded.

Continue reading

From Lewrockwell.com, here.

The Next Jewish Frontier: Prophecy

First, what is “prophecy”? Fools and madmen are a mere “taste”. Nor do I speak of Divine Inspiration, of various levels. Nor of asking a school boy what he learned that day. Nor… No. I mean the actual legal (halachic) category.

The true “Navi” is one who is accepted by a Jewish court for having performed a miraculous sign in the presence of two kosher Jewish witnesses.

This is not a joke.

See Maimonides, Foundations of the Torah, chapter 7, end:

Not everyone who performs signs or wonders should be accepted as a prophet: only a person who is known to be fit for prophecy beforehand; i.e., his wisdom and his [good] deeds surpass those of all his contemporaries. If he follows the paths of prophecy in holiness, separating himself from worldly matters, and afterwards performs a sign or wonder and states that he was sent by God, it is a mitzvah to listen to him, as [Deuteronomy 18:15] states: “Listen to him.”

It is possible that a person will perform a sign or wonder even though he is not a prophet – rather, the wonder will have [another cause] behind it. It is, nevertheless, a mitzvah to listen to him. Since he is a wise man of stature and fit for prophecy, we accept [his prophecy as true], for so have we been commanded.

[To give an example of a parallel:] We are commanded to render a [legal] judgment based on the testimony of two witnesses. Even though they may testify falsely, since we know them to be acceptable [as witnesses], we presume that they [are telling the truth].

Considering these matters and the like, [Deuteronomy 29:28] states: “The hidden matters are for God, our Lord, but what is revealed is for us and our children,” and [I Samuel 16:7] states: “Man sees what is revealed to the eyes, but God sees into the heart.”

Jews must seek prophecy anew. This is not mere preference. We need a prophet for the various upcoming stages of Jewish history, such as building the Temple, establishing priestly lineage (“yichus”), waging wars, kingship, identifying the true Messiah, and more.

Originally one prophet would teach another, in special schools for this purpose.

See Derech Hashem Part Three 4:2, “On Prophecy”:

ענין המתלמדים בנבואה

וממה שצריך שתדע שהנה לא יגיע הנביא אל המדריגה העליונה בפעם אחת אבל יעלה מעלה אחר מעלה עד הגיעו אל הנבואה השלימה. ויש בדבר התלמדות כמו כל שאר החכמות והמלאכות שיעלה האדם במדריגותיהם עד שיעמוד על בורין. וזה ענין”בני הנביאים” שהיו עומדים לפני הנביא להתלמד בדרכי הנבואה מה שהיה מצטרך לזה.

But can it be done all alone, in our orphaned age, without teachers who are themselves prophets?

I think so. We simply cannot wait until Techiyas Hameisim (the Resurrection of the Dead). The temple will be rebuilt before the Resurrection of the Dead, see Rabbi Brand‘s proofs here (towards the end)!

Restoring true prophecy is a DIY (Do It Yourself) project. This is no different than the renascent Sanhedrin project, and maybe better.

So? Forget yeshivas for Kabbalah. Who wants to be the first to open “Yeshivat Bnei Hanevi’im”? The line between madness and ‘vision’ is always thin.

Come on… You know you want to!

Does Ritual Parchment (Klaf) Require a Hechsher?

Sofer Offers Refund or Free Replacement

As a Sofer, I have always used certain types of klaf that were easier to write on, in the belief that certification made the klaf of a higher standard, yet was not essential. I relied on the factories to use only G-d fearing, Jewish labor when processing hides designed for use as STaM klaf.

Upon hearing of the Elul 5766 scandal, I turned to leading Rabbinic authorities from both Israel and the Diaspora, all of whom ruled that the “regular” parchment was of doubtful validity. There’s a high probability that the lime-soakage was done by Gentiles who are always considered to lack the needed intention (lishma), rendering the parchment completely unkosher.

I must now either fully reimburse my customers, or rewrite all my work on hechsher-bearing klaf. My customers can reach me at the number below. In the meantime, none of my work may be used, including tefillin, mezuzos, etc. I hope this notice suffices.

__________________________________________________
Clarification
Regarding the overwhelming response to my previous notice entitled “Sofer Offers Refund or Free Replacement”, I’d like to clarify a few points:

(a) It has been brought to my attention that quite a few prominent Poskim, among them Av Beis Din Zichron Meir Rabbi Shmuel Wosner, Badatz Eidah Hachareidis and tens of Rabbis from America had by Teves 5761 already issued a ruling to the effect that the use of unsupervised klaf is absolutely forbidden and that 86 well known Rabbis had said the same thing a hundred years ago.

(b) Distinguished rabbis have contacted me to offer encouragement in withstanding this trial of great monetary loss.

(c) In the wake of this scandal, I confronted the person who’d instructed me in the art of writing upon certain klaf that is easier to write on even though it lacks Kosher certification. We asked a great Posek who should be responsible for the free refunds. The ruling was that my teacher, the sellers, and I all should share the reimbursement expenses. The Posek also showed us no less than six pamphlets concerning this very subject. My teacher was shocked and agreed to help pay my customers.

Shmuel Nesanel Blum, Sofer STaM, Bet Shemesh

(Formerly of Kiryat Yoel, NY)

Grandson of the Kashoi Gaon zatzal

011-972-2-991-0591