뉴데일리 "박근혜 옷값 7억 추궁했으니, 김정숙 옷값도 공개하라" 청와대 국민청원 "박근혜 의상비 지적하더니 지금은 왜 떳떳하지 않은가" "대통령 부인 옷 구입비 투명하게 공개하는 게 민주주의" 靑 "공개하라" 법원에 항소… 文 임기 끝나면 15년간 비공개 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 윤석열 취임즉시 50조 추경해 약속한 소상공인지원금 600만원 더뿌린다 --->이 놈도 지금 국가 채무가 얼마나 중차대한 문제인지 모르기는 한 가지네. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 요새 이 아줌마 뭐함? 아기수박 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11403787440 헌재 재판관 이정미 (-.ㅡ*) / 일베 댓글 저런년이 나 판사요하고..부귀영화를 누리니.. 면사무소 9급보다도 못한년들이... 선관위 노정희 이런년 봐라...완전히 정치권력의 "개 노릇 하잔아.. 우리나라 사법부 전부 뒤집어 버려야함 못배우고 무식하면 그러려니 하는데 좀 배웠다 하는애들의 정치권력,유착은 나라 망하는 지름길이다 정말 집에서 밥이나할 여자들이 나 판사요 하고 있으니.. 자기 판사로써의 소신과 ,신념이 있었다면 이런 개가튼 판결은 절대 못하지.. 우리나라 년,놈들은 확실히 전부다 자기능력에 비해 너무도 과분한 자리에 있는게 맞다 모든 국민들이 다 이럼.. 생각해보면 자기가할일 제대로 안한 저런년들,.. 재들이 진짜 역적임. 개 가튼 년들 찐짜 생각할수록 빡치네....씨발,,,, @요술공주망치 헌재는 재판관 한명한명 그자체가 법이기 때문에 각자 합헌 혹은 위헌 판결이 나와야 하는건데.. 그것도 8명이 합의봄 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 이 개짓거리를 하는게 우리나라 최고 법률가라고 하는놈들..ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 더 코메디는 대한민국 법으로 먹고사는 그 유명대학 출신 변호사,판사,검사 법과대학 교수나부랭이 새끼들.. 어느 한새끼도 이런걸 지적을 안함...ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ엌ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 여기서 더 소름돗더라... 와...이정도로 대한민국이 썩은줄 몰랐음.. 정말 저런놈들이 일반인들 판결 한다는게.. 개 코메디아님?? 이런걸 국민들이 제대로 안다면 법적 저항이 앞으로더 엄청날거다 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 정수기 까르띠에 표범 브로치 최근 경매가.art 썬더비둘기 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11403746881 지인이 까르띠에 VIP가 있어서 표범 브로치 물어봤는데 첨본다함. 그러고선 하는말이 까르띠에 홈페이지에 없는 제품도 꽤 있는데 그런건 거의 ART로 취급돼서 경매판에서도 ㅆㅅㅌㅊ로 인정받는다함 물론 구매도 VIP는 못하고 VVVIP 정도 되어야 구경이라도 할수있다함 경매판에서 나온다고 하길래 담배한대피고 똥싸러와서 정수기가 차고나온 표범이랑 거의 비슷한 느낌의 최근 물품 찾아봄 10분 정도 찾으니 게이들도 들어봤을법한 크리스티 옥션에서 팔린 내역 발견 아래는 정수기가 차고 나온 표범 아래는 거의 유사한 까르띠에 표범 스위스프랑 384,500 -> 한화로 무려 4억9천8백만원 4년전쯤 경매가니까 지금 비슷한거 나오면 7억은 하지 않을까 예상함 정수기 표범 찐이면 그 돈은 어디서 났을까 짭이면 도대체 어디서 샀을까 ㅋㅋㅋㅋ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 뉴시스 최강욱 의원, 윤석열씨 칭하며 "망나니들 장난에 무릎꿇지 않아" 나라의 주인은 분명 국민이라는 점을, 윤석열씨의 몸과 마음에 확실히 새겨줄 수 있도록 하겠다" "망나니들의 장난질에 부서지고 망가지더라도 결코 무릎꿇지 않을 것이다. "무도하고 잔인한 권력은 결코 방치될 수 없고 용서할 수 없다는 다짐을 깊이 새기고 한 걸음이라도 나아가겠다" "진정한 싸움은, 이제부터 시작" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- nytimes가 보도하는 "불가사의한 Ukraine전황".........nytimes의 과장아닐까 싶을 정도로 잘싸우는 Ukraine공군...... 좌빨잡자 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11403791194 nytimes紙는 톱뉴스로, 미 국방부의 보도를 인용 다음과 같이 보도하고있다. "Russia’s Combat Forces Have Shrunk, Pentagon Says" 구태어 언급한다면, "미국방부언급에 의하면 '러시아는 고전하고있다' "정도 아니겠는가? 이기시는, 중간에 "How Ukraine’s Outgunned Air Force Is Fighting Back Against Russian Jets" 이기사 밑에 익명을 요구한 한 전투기 조종사의 기사와 함께 다음과 같은 내용을 소개하고있다....... 도대체 Ukraine공군의 이 전투력은 어디서 나오는 것일까??????? 참으로 불가사의한 일이 아닐 수없다. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [림종썩동무] "" 윤당선자는 하루라도 청와대에 와서 있어야한다"" 찰리스누피 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11403742334 청와대 내부에 박아놓은, 주사파 부역자들과 짱깨좆족 간첩포함, 정규직/계약직 약 2,000명 고용승계를 떠넘겨서 윤석열에게 올가미를 씌우려는 꼼수임 고용승계후 인력감축시, 윤석열의 책임으로 공격하고, 추후 잔여인력은 결국 윤석열을 감시함. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 중앙일보 "GOP 간부, 근무중 유튜브·게임…영상감시 보고하면 욕설" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 조선일보 [단독] 자영업자, 코로나 이전 文정부 시작부터 무너졌다 22일 유경준 국민의힘 의원이 국세청에서 제출받은 소득신고 자료를 분석한 결과, 소득을 0원 또는 ‘마이너스’로 신고한 자영업자는 2017년 17만9000명에서 2018년 22만6000명으로 늘었고, 2020년 28만2000명으로 껑충 뛰었다. 2020년 소득신고를 한 자영업자는 523만명인데 이 중 5.3%가 소득이 0원 이하인 것이다. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 조선일보 “탈퇴하니 일감 뺏어, 민노총 막아달라” 前 민노총 조합원들 시위 [NOW] 90여명이 수사 촉구, 경찰청앞 릴레이 시위 민노총 압박에 백기 든 건설 현장… 덤프트럭 배차 일감 몰아주기도 민노총 “조합 소속돼 받은 일감, 탈퇴 했으니 돌려주는 게 맞아” “대한민국에서는 민주노총에 가입해야만 생계를 이어갈 수 있는 건가요?” -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 조선일보 거리두기 지키며 2년 버텼는데… 사망·확진 세계 최악 ‘허망한 K방역’ 거리두기·영업시간 지키라해서 지켰는데… 최근 1주일 인구 대비 사망자 세계 1위 국민 희생으로 2년간 버텼지만… 누적 확진 1000만명 넘어서 정부 “세계가 K방역 감탄” 전문가 “최근 폭증, 방역 실패란 뜻” ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 문재인에 맞서다 경찰체포 탄압, 결국 승리한 전MBC 언론인 충격 폭로.(220323) https://youtu.be/GxsuwTMPpno BJ톨 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 국가주권주의 해결법은 그릇된 추론이다. non sequitur란 라틴어로서 문자적으로 “논리적으로 그렇지 않다”라는 뜻이다. 즉 근거 없는 추론이란 듯이다. 제임스 메디슨의 말 <인간이 천사라면 정부는 필요 없을 것이다>라는 말은, 국가를 합리화 하는 그릇된 추론의 대표적인 사례이다. 메디슨은 정부가 국민과 정부 자체까지도 통제할 수 있다고 믿었지만, 권력을 가진 사람들 자신들도 천사가 아니므로 다시 그들을 누가 통제하느냐는 문제가 생긴다. 프랑스의 바스티아 역시 당시 사회주의 정부의 그릇된 추론을 신랄히 비판했다. 좌파들은 교묘한 말 장난으로 정부와 “사회”를 혼동하게 했다. 그래서 정부에 의한 교육을 비판하면, 교육 자체를 반대한다고 악의적으로 선전했다. The Statist "Solution" Really Is a Non Sequitur Joshua Mawhorter A non sequitur is a rudimentary yet common logical fallacy that occurs when a supposed conclusion does not necessarily follow from the previous argumentation. In Latin, the phrase non sequitur literally means “it does not follow.” Simply, a non sequitur is an unjustified inference. There is assumed to be some point of connection between points of argument and conclusion when, in fact, there is not. This error in thinking is common and easier to commit than we may admit. Something that seems to be obviously connected to us in our argument may not be. The non sequitur is a subset of the fallacy of question-begging or elementary circular reasoning—when an argument or statement arbitrarily assumes what it seeks to prove. The logical error in question-begging, non sequiturs included, is not that something is invalid or inconsistent, but that it is unjustified. What Is the Statist Non Sequitur? The statist non sequitur involves the existence of a problem followed by the alleged solution of statism. It is typically put in the form of a statement or a loaded question presupposing the necessity of a “solution” imposed by the state as the obvious and sole conclusion. The first and foremost example of this is the arbitrary justification of the state in general. Said best by James Madison, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.” This oft-quoted statement, clever as it may seem, does not solve the problem, but only relocates it. Given the human capacity for error and corruption, external accountability is required, but the unjustified inference is that this external accountability must come from the political state—an entity also operated by humans of like nature with power. By his own standard, if what Madison says about humans is true, his conclusion is arguably worse. This is the core starting point of the statist non sequitur that has a multitude of expressions. Madison was not unaware. He acknowledged that there was an obvious problem with a government of “men over men.” The problem is that Madison believed that the government could control the governed, then control itself. The inescapable dilemma is that humans' lack of self-restraint, which allegedly necessitates the state in the first place, does not disappear when political power is added. Government and Monopoly The next and closely related expression of this fallacy is the issue of monopoly. The problem presented is the existence of a monopoly, and the alleged “solution” is the application of state power. Again, the problem is not solved, but relocated. Government is a monopoly, so the alleged solution contains the core of the problem. This demonstrates the internal invalidity of the argument, but the unjustified question-begging aspect is the illogical step from the problem of monopoly to the solution of the state. The role for civil government does not equal a monopolistic political state; therefore, it does not necessarily follow that a state monopoly is a solution to monopoly. Just how common the error of elementary circular reasoning is in general, and how common the statist non sequitur is in particular, can be seen in a multitude of examples. I argue that the statist non sequitur, in all its various forms, is the most common fallacious argument with which libertarians deal and, if we can recognize it, we then can more readily identify it for the nonargument it is. It is so normal because question-begging is common and the Hobbesian modern nation-state model has been the default understanding of government for centuries; therefore, the statist non sequitur is quite natural. Reverse Statist Non Sequitur The statist non sequitur can also work in the reverse—the assumption that, absent statism, some important service could not or would not exist or would be “underproduced.” Every libertarian has heard the most hackneyed negative version of the statist non sequitur, “Without government, who would build the roads?” It is astounding that it has been easier to convince people to send their children to kill and die in wars, pay exorbitant taxes, shoulder unpayable government debt, and passively observe general criminal behavior from political elites than to convince people that roads could be built without the state. The statist non sequitur is taken even further because when someone criticizes some aspect of state action that has nothing to do with roads, they often use that as a justification for the state. What do roads have to do with the Iraq War? What does the Federal Reserve have to do with the local fire department? Just because we are required to pay for all of these through taxation—the thing that connects these government services and actions—and just because we use the roads does not mean that we implicitly accept the criminal actions of the state. It also does not follow that without government there could or would be no roads. Frédéric Bastiat recognized the statist non sequitur in the French socialists of his time, Socialism, like the old policy from which it emanates, confounds Government and society. And so, every time we object to a thing being done by Government, it concludes that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of education by the State—then we are against education altogether. We object to a State religion—then we would have no religion at all. We object to an equality which is brought about by the State then we are against equality, etc., etc. They might as well accuse us of wishing men not to eat, because we object to the cultivation of corn by the State. (emphasis added) Bastiat identified several errors in this thinking. He noted that “government” and the state do not equal “society.” Assuming so, confounding two distinct concepts as the same, allows people to borrow capital from the concept of “society”— free and peaceful human social interaction and cooperation—in order to justify the state. Murray N. Rothbard pointed out the same lapse in logic: “The great non sequitur committed by defenders of the State . . . is to leap from the necessity of society to the necessity of the State.” (Rothbard, Ethics of Liberty, p. 187). When dealing with the statist non sequitur, usually one is left attempting to explain a complex of theoretical and/or practical ideas about how, in the absence of the state, something could be provided (e.g., roads, security services, police, courts, money, provision for the poor, care for children, etc.) rather than pointing out the statist non sequitur for what it really is—a fallacy. While there are creative answers to the questions of provision of these goods and services without the state, the unjustified presupposition(s) should not be ignored. Before jumping in to provide an extensive apologetic about how something might still work in absence of the state, the logical leap ought to be pointed out. That statist non sequitur also limits possibility to the imagination(s) of those involved. Just because someone could not imagine how something could or would be provided, it does not necessarily follow that it is not conceivably possible. For example, someone could have said a decade ago, “I can’t imagine how there could be any type of space program without NASA.” Whether or not someone can imagine this has no connection with whether or not it is actually possible. People usually accept this but do not apply it consistently to the state. “I cannot imagine how . . .” is not logically followed by “Therefore, the state must . . .” The statist non sequitur goes further than simply assuming that something is impossible without coercive state action. Often when someone cannot imagine how a thing would work without the state, they assume that it must necessarily be done by the state. This is a dangerous assumption. Ignorance is no crime. It is perfectly acceptable to admit that we do not know how a great many things work or how something yet not created or implemented would work. It is even forgivable to mistakenly assume that something not yet done may be impossible (e.g., man landing on the moon in the 1800s). The danger of the statist non sequitur is that it acknowledges ignorance or lack of imagination about possibilities but then arbitrarily assumes that the application of some form of coercive violence by the state is the sole solution. Examples—Spot the Statist Non Sequitur Whether the first statement or premise is correct or not, the non sequitur fallacy involves an unjustified or arbitrary inference from the premise. In a non sequitur fallacy the premise, true or otherwise, has no necessary connection to the conclusion. The problem is usually in the “therefore.” Below are several examples (many more could be added) whose premise or concern may illicit more or less sympathy but which all involve a form of the statist non sequitur. See if you can spot the error of question-begging in each example that assumes statism as the solution. “I care about kids and poor people. [Therefore, the welfare state.]” “But don’t we have an obligation to help the poor?” “Healthcare is a right. [Therefore, it is to be managed by the state.]” “Free speech has limits; for example, you can’t yell ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater.” “Don’t want to pay taxes? Move to Somalia.” “There has to be someone to regulate safety and quality standards.” “Capitalism is inherently unstable. [Therefore, a central banking monopoly].” “[Assad, Saddam Hussein, Dictator X] gassed his own people. [Therefore, war and the warfare state].” “So, we should just do nothing?” “What about America’s allies?” “How else would Hitler have been stopped if not by war? [Therefore, since the current situation corresponds to Hitler’s military adventurism, the United States must intervene militarily.]” “I want to live in a society where people are educated, and a lot of parents do not have access to alternatives. [Therefore, the state must tax to provide mandatory public school systems].” “[Loaded question:] So you don’t want people to be educated?” “We live in a society!” “America is systemically racist. [Therefore, political elites must be granted greater power in order to address this problem.]” “How else would we have parks?” “The existence of billionaires is a policy failure.” “We need government to regulate capitalism, maintain safety and quality standards, prevent monopolies.” “Follow the science.” “If you don’t like it, leave!” “You pay taxes!” “You use government services!” “You follow the laws!” “I don’t condone people doing X.” “There should be a law against X!” Conclusion One hopes that it is obvious how prevalent it is for people to assume the default of statism or the need thereof as an unstated presupposition. Arguably, question-begging—of which the non sequitur is a subcategory—is the most common logical error, and since the Hobbesian modern nation-state model has been the default for about four centuries, it is to be expected that this logical error would combine with statism to create the statist non sequitur. That being said, it ought to be refuted for the fallacious and even dangerous error that it is. Author: Joshua Mawhorter Joshua Mawhorter has been a junior high and high school teacher for the past five years in the subjects of government/economics and US history. Josh has a bachelor’s degree in political science from California State University, Bakersfield (CSUB) and a master’s in political science from Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU). He publishes content on his YouTube channel Political Factions and is working on a Mawhorter Finance channel. He also teaches regularly at his local church in the areas of theology, the Old Testament, church history, apologetics, and philosophy. He can be contacted at mawhorterfinancialcoach@gmail.com. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------