In reply to my post below, a friend asks: “Could you explain the notion of “ordered anarchy”? What is the source of the order? What maintains it?”

These are good questions, addressing an important political theory.  I will try find time soon to answer them in detail (as best I can; I understand the concept only as a layman).  For now, however, I refer anyone interested in the subject to the writings of Anthony de Jasay, the French political economist who has best expounded on the concept.  His books “The State” and “Against Politics” are brilliant – I would almost say revolutionary – arguments against the dangers of excessive state control and manipulation of human capital and social and economic markets.

A useful, brief (but free!) introduction to Jasay’s work can be found here.

Ski forecast in hell: packed powder base, inches of fresh powder on all slopes.  That’s no more surprising than finding that Senator Dianne Feinstein and I agree on something. (I quote the entire article below.)

Few things are more vital to protection of civil liberties than government transparency. Though I most often oppose her conventional and predictable statist positions, she is fairly aggressive in guarding against unnecessary government secrecy.  The current and previous presidential administrations have expanded federal opacity to dangerous levels.  Kudos to Senator Feinstein for demanding better…at least in this case.

The CIA’s internal watchdog claims it accidentally deleted its only copy of the controversial “torture report” outlining the agency’s use of enhanced interrogations techniques, the latest wrinkle in the saga over the report’s publication.

The Senate Intelligence Committee’s 6,700-page report has not yet been made public by the Obama administration and has been at the center over a years-long fight to make the report public. There are other copies of the report at other federal agencies.

Former Chair and current ranking Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein has been pushing for the report to be released while Republican Chairman Richard Burr has opposed even distribution of the full report to the executive branch, let alone the public.

Yahoo News first reported Monday that the CIA inspector general had “mistakenly” deleted both the electronic and hard copy of the report. Yahoo reported that officials deleted the uploaded version of the report and then accidentally destroyed a disk that contained the report.

Other agencies have been given copies of the report but the development has alarmed Feinstein, who immediately wrote to CIA Director John Brennan and Attorney General Loretta Lynch calling for the IG to be given another copy “immediately.”

“Your prompt response will allay my concern that this was more than an ‘accident,'” Feinstein wrote pointedly to Brennan and Lynch.

The error comes just days after a federal appeals court Friday rejected efforts to release the full version of the report, upholding a lower court decision that said the report is a congressional record exempt from disclosure laws.

The committee released a 500-plus-page summary of the report to the public in 2014, but the American Civil Liberties Union sued to obtain the full version.

This evening I discovered why seed consumption has tripled from the bird feeders.  A pair of Monk Parakeets have discovered the stash.  They are voracious, raucous, verdant scoundrels.  I like them here; they fit right in.

Late Saturday afternoon, so Jenny decided that all work stops for the day so that petting can begin.

One of my many objections to “progressivism” is its belief that government – the state – acts as a force for the public good superior to the “ordered anarchy” (the libertarian term for it) of individuals and markets unencumbered by the state.  The arguments of progressives and statists, to even pretend any semblance of validity, must assume that the state behaves with objective disinterest to a degree greater than the society it governs.  The flaw in this theory lies, or course, in the actors who maneuver the instruments of the state: human beings.

In December, two prominent New York state politicians were convicted on corruption charges.  They were assessed fines and sentenced to prison terms.  Justice fairly and rightly served, no?  No.  State laws in New York – which almost rivals Illinois in the breadth and depth of its political corruption – provide that both men (one Democrat, one Republican) receive their state pensions in spite of their criminal convictions:

“Despite their criminal convictions, two of New York’s former top lawmakers won’t be suffering financial hardship.

“Both former New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and former Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos will be receiving sizeable pensions.

“The New York State Comptroller’s Office said Silver will get a monthly pension of just over $6,000. Skelos will receive just under $8,000 per month.

“Both men retired from their top political jobs just after their December 2015 convictions on federal corruption charges.

“Silver’s pension will add up to $79,222.68 per year. Skelos will get $95,831.52 per year.”

These pensions are funded by New York taxpayers.  In spite of their criminal behavior, Silver and Skelos are still subsidized while in prison and for the remainder of their life by the very constituents they betrayed.

They are not alone.  More than a dozen other criminal politicians in New York are being subsidized by taxpayers:

“…New York’s pension system is paying out about $531,000 per year to 14 other former state lawmakers and officials who have been convicted of a crime.”

To my progressive/statist readers I ask: where in the private sector, which you are so quick to belittle and control, will you find convicted criminals who are provided retirement benefits courtesy of taxpayers?  You will not.  Only those who control the levers of the state can grant themselves such grotesque and illiberal booty.

We owe no allegiance to any government or state which so criminally burdens us.  Those who have forgotten who they serve deserve nothing but scorn and rebellion from those so ill-served.

Tuesday morning I bid farewell to three old friends who stood by me until well into my 59th year: my remaining wisdom teeth.  Only one truly needed removing, for being ‘hyper erupted’ due to lacking an opposing tooth, but experts recommended the others be let go, also.

I was a good boy for three and a half days, following all inhuman instructions and guidelines – soft food only, no tobacco or alcohol, dreary medication regimen (except for the codeine pills – I’d have to be writhing in pain first, and I wasn’t) – but tonight, being Friday, I rebelled against that dental tyranny, and indulged in my lovely routine of Scotch and smoke.  At my age, I don’t suffer fools or foolishness lightly.