Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
THE SAUDI – US – IRAN RELATIONSHIP Washington is Saudi Arabia’s mercenary force by Aaron Kahland
—“Iran is run by Shia fundamentalists. Shia Islam arose and was influenced by the moderating force that was Zoroastrianism. Iran’s Islamic revolution was a national-liberation struggle against the puppet-like regime of the Shah – who was installed by the CIA – as we now know for certain.
The remainder of the Arabic Middle East is dominated by both secular and religious Sunni regimes. These regimes sell their oil to US (and British) companies that profit from value-added activites such as refining.
In exchange for the license to purchase this crude oil, the US (and Britain) agree to support Sunni expansionism in the Middle East. This is why when Saudi Arabia invades Bahrain (majority Shia) or Northern Yemen or backs insurrections in Shia-ruled Syria – Washington immediately imposes sanctions on those object of Sunni expansion and begins to supply weapons to Saudi-Arabian backed protagonists.
This is why Romanian made Kalashnikovs purchased by Washington ended up in the hands of ISIS. It is also why Muslim Bosnians were armed with weapons licensed by the US and manufactured in Egypt – and much of the reason why US bombs fell on those fighting Muslims in the Balkans.
To put it accurately, Washington is Saudi Arabia’s mercenary force in the Middle East. That is what explains the US’ seventy-odd years of pursuing geo-political goals that are directly in conflict with its own strategic interests. The US is, to put it frankly, Sunni-Islam’s bitch.”— Aaron Kahland
This fellow cited me in a paper. The cite is my argument that there are no influential living philosophers, because science theorizing) has a higher standard of thought than philosophy (philosophizing).
It looks like he is working on a book. He has put out a handful of papers.
He has a very similar program in mind on science versus philosophy.
He is from Paris and writes in the french model (Cartesian Rationalist) not the german or english, but it’s all scientific.
What’s interesting is that he is in the Art business (as I used to be). Hopefully I get to chat with him at some point and expore his thinking a bit. Particularly the science – art axis.
Some of his paintings are attached. (I was trained in representationalism and art history so I’m kinda old fashioned compared to him.)
His artwork is successful. You have to break the 15k barrier, then the 30K barrier to make a good living at it. So he apparently is doing it.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ulrich-de-balbian-5a080538/Rasa ChandraAs someone primarily grounded in an aesthetic understanding of reality, this art is absolute garbage.Jul 30, 2018 12:40pmClark SmithAm I a rube or is that art legitimately garbage?Jul 30, 2018 12:40pmCurt DoolittleActually, for the market he’s chasing, this is good work. Most Americans would use higher paint density (more material) but if you study french painting particularly postwar this fits the model which is more influenced by sketch and watercolor or pastels.
I would explain to you what you’re all getting wrong, but it’s because you are looking for a monument that seizes your attention not for decoration that contributes to the attention of the environment.
When I was in school we were taught these categories, and these signal affluent decor (taste). I learned how to make monumental work from Zalinger, Goldstien, and Salle. Only Salle still lives and works today. And we called this monumental work ‘bank paintings’.
And my kind of work (representationalism) was called ‘illustration’. with derogatory implications.Jul 30, 2018 12:43pmCurt DoolittleRussians are currently the best living artists in terms of craftsmanship and tradition. There isn’t anything close to either their quality diversity and volume.Jul 30, 2018 12:57pmJames KnowlesPlease share some recent examples, i have been dying to see non modernist crap for a while.Jul 30, 2018 1:09pmJames BrittinghamWhere’s a good place to find the kind of Russian art you are talking about? Are you describing iconography, or contemporary stuff?Jul 30, 2018 1:10pmJosh LourencoIt’s trash, and buying it is a form of signalling you’re a post modernist, cosmopolitan .Jul 30, 2018 1:14pmJosh LourencoSelling it on the other hand is just a way of making money in clown world. We all do jobs we don’t necessarily believe in. Not saying this guy does or doesn’t do this.Jul 30, 2018 1:16pmCurt DoolittleInteresting So if I had left the image off the page, and attached a screeshot of his many papers and articles then …. see? lolJul 30, 2018 1:17pmJames BrittinghamThe only good-faith entry into the nytimes recent unifficial “space force” logo contest, was by Goldstein devotee. A lot of 80s guys would talk about the Burkean sublime, but Goldstein seems like he really got it.Jul 30, 2018 1:56pmAustin GuestExcuse me, Best living artists? Please, give me a break.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/chantelhouston/we-painted-in-our-period-blood-to-break-the-stigma-that?utm_term=.peny477WOQ#.jmjmjzz8ODJul 30, 2018 2:16pmJames BrittinghamAustin Guest I bet he was referring to different Russian artists.Jul 30, 2018 2:20pmEric BestAustin Guest DELETJul 30, 2018 2:21pmJohn MarkNo art expert here, but it seems self-evident that the skill required to make something like this sculpture is far beyond the skill required to make even the most sophisticated smudges on a wall. That being said, some art is meant to blend in and is not meant to grab the attention the way this sculpture does.Jul 30, 2018 2:31pmBrendan M.P. HeardIf art is good you can explain how and why, rationally, scientifically, just like anything else.Everybody’s naive initial reaction to modern art (could a child have done this?) remains true – if there is the possibility that a child or monkey could have done it, it can not be genius. For example, Rembrandt could have made these ‘paintings’ (not that he’d want to) – but this ‘artist’ could never in his life paint a Rembrandt.Jul 30, 2018 3:11pmLance BeanI get it. Good for him.Jul 30, 2018 3:27pmShawn MinerI draw things that look like things, I try to capture the image and inspire a certain emotion in my art. Ive spent uears getting here and while not a master portrait artist, come on, that is better then some spilled ink. I am actually insulted that he sells those for $30k.Jul 30, 2018 3:41pmCurt DoolittleLET ME HELP:
– Monumental Architecture is self selecting due to cost.
– Monumental Sculpture is self selecting due to cost.
– Monumental Painting is self selecting due to cost.
– Life Size Representationalism (not photorealism) in painting is self selecting due to cost (hours).
HOWEVER
– Painting, Print, and Photography are not self selecting.
They are middle, working, and lower class substitutes for monuments.
– Even for the upper middle and upper class, and out-of-sight class, the few pieces of quality art that are canon (mentioned in art magazines and books, and references, or which had popular press) are inaccessible. Demand is just too high. So given the high signal value of art (yes it is an extreme expression of dominance), the market has had to experiment with novelty in order to satisfy demand.
Much of what ordinary people rail against is the same as railing against fashion: for those in the fashion industries (of which display art is a member) novelty has to function as a substitute for scarcity of craftsmanship quality (note my particular distaste for the so called ‘art glass’ industry).
AS SUCH
– Monumental works convey ideas (allegiances, heroics, beauty)
– The demand for low cost high production ‘decoration’
(a) may form an icon or ‘remembrance’.
(b) may decorate the environment.
(c) may reflect the monumental, life sized, and representational, is misplaced in non monumental size (which is what most of us intuit as great work).
IN OTHER WORDS
– Monumental work is misplaced in most homes and offices in market (business) and is generally reserved for the political and institutional and aristocratic.
– Most homes cannot support monumental work and require only design (decoration).
– Most people are actually not capable of design, or capable of acquiring the monumental.
– As such the colorful, abstract, the impressionistic, are to homes as type design and color pallet are to print and display advertising.
IN OTHER WORDS
– when people purchase relatively well made ‘design’ (abstract, gestural, impressionistic) of architectural size (to fill a wall) they are practicing good aesthetics (not acting on pretense).
– when people pay homage to the monumental in private spaces, they are practicing good aesthetics. (small engineering drawings, paintings of flowers, well constructed prints)
– when people pay homage to the monumental in architectural spaces (your living room, hallway, or dining room, or office) you are (a) alienating others, and (b)
PERSONAL: ALLORA AND I
We purchased a detailed mezzotint (print) of an elaborately painstakingly made tree that is about four or five feet tall in all, and framed in a wide matte and black frame. This was the centerpeice of the livingroom between two custom made bookcases.
And in the center of the living room we had a glass table with her art jewelry collection and work. And Allora decorated a hallway with dozens of small pieces of framed photographs, etchings, mezzotints, and collections of remembrances.
We were a rare couple because we were the last generation – you actually can’t get an art education any longer. the marxists have destroyed art on purpose just as they have destroyed literature, academics, law, and history.
It is nearly impossible to ‘be cultured’ in the aristocratic sense any longer.
And it was destroyed on purpose by (((the marxists, socialists and postmodernists))).Jul 30, 2018 4:07pmBrendan M.P. HeardThere was no splatter painting, and no gimpy conceptual installations, for the entirety of history, from the poor farmhouse to the kings palace, until Clement Greenberg invented ‘artspeak’ in the 20’s (to excuse Kandinsky), redefining art itself (abstract art) as something that, as he put it, ‘transcended standards’ (has no standard).Jul 30, 2018 4:10pmMurray SellThis is also the position that Steven hawking took. He said “philosophy was dead”.Jul 30, 2018 4:15pmMurray SellJames WingJul 30, 2018 4:18pmCurt DoolittleA couple of things happend that we need to take into account.
1 – Photography destroyed the artists capacity to earn just like photoshop destroyed the art supply business (which I was a significant player in) and drove everyone to digital.
2 – There was a HUGE increase in demand for decorative arts as the size of the middle class expanded.
3 – The urban apartment and war era panel products and mass manufacturing produced an environment unsuitable for curvalinear arts
4 – Immigration created the problem of producing decoration for new groups who neither wanted to reflect their (peasant) ancestry but wanted to signal their new influences.
5 – The marxists exploited this like they did all other immoral market opportunities.Jul 30, 2018 4:18pmCurt Doolittle(I’m actually a fan of splatter painting since I recognize it not as art but as decoration. I don’t consider tattoo’s art, nor the decroration of dinner plates art, and I don’t consider splatter painting art, but decoration. And as decoration of the modern postwar apartment it served its purpose.Jul 30, 2018 4:19pmLance BeanI cannot believe you spend your time explaining shit to people when you should be focussing on more important things. I’m doing the same right now. We suck.Jul 30, 2018 4:21pmBrendan M.P. HeardThe destruction of art with relativism was the first big successful (((swindle))). It cheapens everything, confuses our link to our past, and makes the middle man exploitation of cheap consumer goods that much easier- via a confusing and meaningless definition of art. There was still quality painting in the age of photography, and people interested in real painting despite the fact they can take photos. To have an age of Beethovens and DaVinci’s you need to have a high respect for art with standards, and an encouraging environment, otherwise it’s chaos, and the hard work required in making true art is not rewarded and thus does not happen. The idea that art is ‘random expression’ has not, in fact, opened endless vistas of possibilities, it has just made things ugly. It is irrational belief. Traditional arts are a science that can be learned like anything else. I would say reclaiming aesthetic art (Platonic beauty values) is of paramount importance.Jul 30, 2018 4:30pmBrendan M.P. HeardAnd it will not be reclaimed unless Greenbergs heart-warming ‘art can be whatever you want’ relativist-Modernist-philosophy is wholly rejected. To have standards is to draw the line, and hurt those feelings, and say ‘this is not good enough’.Jul 30, 2018 4:33pmCurt Doolittle(((They wanted to dominate in this country so they soiled everything that was incompatible with their identity.)))
BTW: this isn’t true of (((the))) southern group, only the eastern european immigrants.Jul 30, 2018 4:35pmJorn BirxAs a person who just likes looking at paintings and appreciating the skill it took to make it, the marketer in me says this guy is good at sales, not at painting. This is not art. This is garbage.Jul 30, 2018 8:49pmJorn BirxThat’s what I’m saying. This guy isn’t an artist, he’s a master salesman.Jul 30, 2018 8:51pmJorn BirxThen we could’ve judged that for quality and skill too.And I pray, for your sake, it far outweighs that of his “artistry,” or we would’ve probably been laughing at you in perpetuity.Jul 30, 2018 8:52pmJorn BirxThat’s a nice way of saying “Don’t defend garbage as art.”Jul 30, 2018 8:52pmJorn BirxAppreciate him not as an artist, appreciate him as a salesman. That’s the real art.Jul 30, 2018 8:53pmShawn MinerI’m not saying I wouldn’t sell the rag I wash my brush with for $30k. I totally would.Jul 30, 2018 9:48pmINTERESTING.
This fellow cited me in a paper. The cite is my argument that there are no influential living philosophers, because science theorizing) has a higher standard of thought than philosophy (philosophizing).
It looks like he is working on a book. He has put out a handful of papers.
He has a very similar program in mind on science versus philosophy.
He is from Paris and writes in the french model (Cartesian Rationalist) not the german or english, but it’s all scientific.
What’s interesting is that he is in the Art business (as I used to be). Hopefully I get to chat with him at some point and expore his thinking a bit. Particularly the science – art axis.
Some of his paintings are attached. (I was trained in representationalism and art history so I’m kinda old fashioned compared to him.)
His artwork is successful. You have to break the 15k barrier, then the 30K barrier to make a good living at it. So he apparently is doing it.
This fellow cited me in a paper. The cite is my argument that there are no influential living philosophers, because science theorizing) has a higher standard of thought than philosophy (philosophizing).
It looks like he is working on a book. He has put out a handful of papers.
He has a very similar program in mind on science versus philosophy.
He is from Paris and writes in the french model (Cartesian Rationalist) not the german or english, but it’s all scientific.
What’s interesting is that he is in the Art business (as I used to be). Hopefully I get to chat with him at some point and expore his thinking a bit. Particularly the science – art axis.
Some of his paintings are attached. (I was trained in representationalism and art history so I’m kinda old fashioned compared to him.)
His artwork is successful. You have to break the 15k barrier, then the 30K barrier to make a good living at it. So he apparently is doing it.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ulrich-de-balbian-5a080538/Rasa ChandraAs someone primarily grounded in an aesthetic understanding of reality, this art is absolute garbage.Jul 30, 2018 12:40pmClark SmithAm I a rube or is that art legitimately garbage?Jul 30, 2018 12:40pmCurt DoolittleActually, for the market he’s chasing, this is good work. Most Americans would use higher paint density (more material) but if you study french painting particularly postwar this fits the model which is more influenced by sketch and watercolor or pastels.
I would explain to you what you’re all getting wrong, but it’s because you are looking for a monument that seizes your attention not for decoration that contributes to the attention of the environment.
When I was in school we were taught these categories, and these signal affluent decor (taste). I learned how to make monumental work from Zalinger, Goldstien, and Salle. Only Salle still lives and works today. And we called this monumental work ‘bank paintings’.
And my kind of work (representationalism) was called ‘illustration’. with derogatory implications.Jul 30, 2018 12:43pmAndrea RoyallThis art isn’t much different than mine… clearly, I’m not marketing myself correctlyJul 30, 2018 12:56pmCurt DoolittleRussians are currently the best living artists in terms of craftsmanship and tradition. There isn’t anything close to either their quality diversity and volume.Jul 30, 2018 12:57pmJames KnowlesPlease share some recent examples, i have been dying to see non modernist crap for a while.Jul 30, 2018 1:09pmJames BrittinghamWhere’s a good place to find the kind of Russian art you are talking about? Are you describing iconography, or contemporary stuff?Jul 30, 2018 1:10pmCurt DoolittleInteresting So if I had left the image off the page, and attached a screeshot of his many papers and articles then …. see? lolJul 30, 2018 1:17pmJames BrittinghamThe only good-faith entry into the nytimes recent unifficial “space force” logo contest, was by Goldstein devotee. A lot of 80s guys would talk about the Burkean sublime, but Goldstein seems like he really got it.Jul 30, 2018 1:56pmAustin GuestExcuse me, Best living artists? Please, give me a break.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/chantelhouston/we-painted-in-our-period-blood-to-break-the-stigma-that?utm_term=.peny477WOQ#.jmjmjzz8ODJul 30, 2018 2:16pmJames Brittingham@[653038498:2048:Austin Guest] I bet he was referring to different Russian artists.Jul 30, 2018 2:20pmEric BestAustin Guest DELETJul 30, 2018 2:21pmJohn MarkNo art expert here, but it seems self-evident that the skill required to make something like this sculpture is far beyond the skill required to make even the most sophisticated smudges on a wall. That being said, some art is meant to blend in and is not meant to grab the attention the way this sculpture does.Jul 30, 2018 2:31pmBrendan M.P. HeardIf art is good you can explain how and why, rationally, scientifically, just like anything else.Everybody’s naive initial reaction to modern art (could a child have done this?) remains true – if there is the possibility that a child or monkey could have done it, it can not be genius. For example, Rembrandt could have made these ‘paintings’ (not that he’d want to) – but this ‘artist’ could never in his life paint a Rembrandt.Jul 30, 2018 3:11pmLance BeanI get it. Good for him.Jul 30, 2018 3:27pmShawn MinerI draw things that look like things, I try to capture the image and inspire a certain emotion in my art. Ive spent uears getting here and while not a master portrait artist, come on, that is better then some spilled ink. I am actually insulted that he sells those for $30k.Jul 30, 2018 3:41pmCurt DoolittleLET ME HELP:
– Monumental Architecture is self selecting due to cost.
– Monumental Sculpture is self selecting due to cost.
– Monumental Painting is self selecting due to cost.
– Life Size Representationalism (not photorealism) in painting is self selecting due to cost (hours).
HOWEVER
– Painting, Print, and Photography are not self selecting.
They are middle, working, and lower class substitutes for monuments.
– Even for the upper middle and upper class, and out-of-sight class, the few pieces of quality art that are canon (mentioned in art magazines and books, and references, or which had popular press) are inaccessible. Demand is just too high. So given the high signal value of art (yes it is an extreme expression of dominance), the market has had to experiment with novelty in order to satisfy demand.
Much of what ordinary people rail against is the same as railing against fashion: for those in the fashion industries (of which display art is a member) novelty has to function as a substitute for scarcity of craftsmanship quality (note my particular distaste for the so called ‘art glass’ industry).
AS SUCH
– Monumental works convey ideas (allegiances, heroics, beauty)
– The demand for low cost high production ‘decoration’
(a) may form an icon or ‘remembrance’.
(b) may decorate the environment.
(c) may reflect the monumental, life sized, and representational, is misplaced in non monumental size (which is what most of us intuit as great work).
IN OTHER WORDS
– Monumental work is misplaced in most homes and offices in market (business) and is generally reserved for the political and institutional and aristocratic.
– Most homes cannot support monumental work and require only design (decoration).
– Most people are actually not capable of design, or capable of acquiring the monumental.
– As such the colorful, abstract, the impressionistic, are to homes as type design and color pallet are to print and display advertising.
IN OTHER WORDS
– when people purchase relatively well made ‘design’ (abstract, gestural, impressionistic) of architectural size (to fill a wall) they are practicing good aesthetics (not acting on pretense).
– when people pay homage to the monumental in private spaces, they are practicing good aesthetics. (small engineering drawings, paintings of flowers, well constructed prints)
– when people pay homage to the monumental in architectural spaces (your living room, hallway, or dining room, or office) you are (a) alienating others, and (b)
PERSONAL: ALLORA AND I
We purchased a detailed mezzotint (print) of an elaborately painstakingly made tree that is about four or five feet tall in all, and framed in a wide matte and black frame. This was the centerpeice of the livingroom between two custom made bookcases.
And in the center of the living room we had a glass table with her art jewelry collection and work. And Allora decorated a hallway with dozens of small pieces of framed photographs, etchings, mezzotints, and collections of remembrances.
We were a rare couple because we were the last generation – you actually can’t get an art education any longer. the marxists have destroyed art on purpose just as they have destroyed literature, academics, law, and history.
It is nearly impossible to ‘be cultured’ in the aristocratic sense any longer.
And it was destroyed on purpose by (((the marxists, socialists and postmodernists))).Jul 30, 2018 4:07pmBrendan M.P. HeardThere was no splatter painting, and no gimpy conceptual installations, for the entirety of history, from the poor farmhouse to the kings palace, until Clement Greenberg invented ‘artspeak’ in the 20’s (to excuse Kandinsky), redefining art itself (abstract art) as something that, as he put it, ‘transcended standards’ (has no standard).Jul 30, 2018 4:10pmCurt DoolittleA couple of things happend that we need to take into account.
1 – Photography destroyed the artists capacity to earn just like photoshop destroyed the art supply business (which I was a significant player in) and drove everyone to digital.
2 – There was a HUGE increase in demand for decorative arts as the size of the middle class expanded.
3 – The urban apartment and war era panel products and mass manufacturing produced an environment unsuitable for curvalinear arts
4 – Immigration created the problem of producing decoration for new groups who neither wanted to reflect their (peasant) ancestry but wanted to signal their new influences.
5 – The marxists exploited this like they did all other immoral market opportunities.Jul 30, 2018 4:18pmCurt Doolittle(I’m actually a fan of splatter painting since I recognize it not as art but as decoration. I don’t consider tattoo’s art, nor the decroration of dinner plates art, and I don’t consider splatter painting art, but decoration. And as decoration of the modern postwar apartment it served its purpose.Jul 30, 2018 4:19pmLance BeanI cannot believe you spend your time explaining shit to people when you should be focussing on more important things. I’m doing the same right now. We suck.Jul 30, 2018 4:21pmBrendan M.P. HeardThe destruction of art with relativism was the first big successful (((swindle))). It cheapens everything, confuses our link to our past, and makes the middle man exploitation of cheap consumer goods that much easier- via a confusing and meaningless definition of art. There was still quality painting in the age of photography, and people interested in real painting despite the fact they can take photos. To have an age of Beethovens and DaVinci’s you need to have a high respect for art with standards, and an encouraging environment, otherwise it’s chaos, and the hard work required in making true art is not rewarded and thus does not happen. The idea that art is ‘random expression’ has not, in fact, opened endless vistas of possibilities, it has just made things ugly. It is irrational belief. Traditional arts are a science that can be learned like anything else. I would say reclaiming aesthetic art (Platonic beauty values) is of paramount importance.Jul 30, 2018 4:30pmBrendan M.P. HeardAnd it will not be reclaimed unless Greenbergs heart-warming ‘art can be whatever you want’ relativist-Modernist-philosophy is wholly rejected. To have standards is to draw the line, and hurt those feelings, and say ‘this is not good enough’.Jul 30, 2018 4:33pmCurt Doolittle(((They wanted to dominate in this country so they soiled everything that was incompatible with their identity.)))
BTW: this isn’t true of (((the))) southern group, only the eastern european immigrants.Jul 30, 2018 4:35pmJorn BirxAs a person who just likes looking at paintings and appreciating the skill it took to make it, the marketer in me says this guy is good at sales, not at painting. This is not art. This is garbage.Jul 30, 2018 8:49pmJorn BirxThen we could’ve judged that for quality and skill too.And I pray, for your sake, it far outweighs that of his “artistry,” or we would’ve probably been laughing at you in perpetuity.Jul 30, 2018 8:52pmJorn BirxThat’s a nice way of saying “Don’t defend garbage as art.”Jul 30, 2018 8:52pmJorn BirxAppreciate him not as an artist, appreciate him as a salesman. That’s the real art.Jul 30, 2018 8:53pmShawn MinerI’m not saying I wouldn’t sell the rag I wash my brush with for $30k. I totally would.Jul 30, 2018 9:48pmINTERESTING.
This fellow cited me in a paper. The cite is my argument that there are no influential living philosophers, because science theorizing) has a higher standard of thought than philosophy (philosophizing).
It looks like he is working on a book. He has put out a handful of papers.
He has a very similar program in mind on science versus philosophy.
He is from Paris and writes in the french model (Cartesian Rationalist) not the german or english, but it’s all scientific.
What’s interesting is that he is in the Art business (as I used to be). Hopefully I get to chat with him at some point and expore his thinking a bit. Particularly the science – art axis.
Some of his paintings are attached. (I was trained in representationalism and art history so I’m kinda old fashioned compared to him.)
His artwork is successful. You have to break the 15k barrier, then the 30K barrier to make a good living at it. So he apparently is doing it.
—“As a conservative, would you prefer a hypothetical effeminate capitalist society or a hypothetical masculine socialist society?”—
STRANGE QUESTION – THE CORRECT ANSWER
Hmmm…. Socialism(equality) is the result of the female reproductive strategy, and capitalism(markets) is the result of a young (ascendent) male reproductive strategy, and classical liberalism(hierarchy) is the result of the established male reproductive strategy, and authoritarianism (command) regardless of redistributive, market, or extractive, is the result of dominant male reproductive strategy. As far as I know fascism has won the postwar competition as the means of rule, and markets as the means of production, and redistribution as the means of gaining the publics permission to rule. All nations of any scale are now fascists (intolerant) mixed economies, with minor variations in corruption and liberty.
Damn. Hayek was Sooooo Close! I wish he were still alive so I could talk with him for just a few hours. He very nearly had it. The wars really screwed up the world. We just have the information today that he didn’t. But given the information available to him in his era, he came so close that I can see every little judgement he made and why. Amazing mind.
