My journey through the world of crypto was a very long and inconvenient one. I was convinced to buy Bitcoin only after I read a 270-page book (with small print), and I am ready to buy my first crypto only after months of research.

I know how many feel about one-stop guides: “they don’t tell you nearly everything you could know”. That is wrong; I will tell you literally everything that a normal human could want to absorb. I’m a diehard Bitcoiner, and I believe the world should run on Bitcoin, for reasons both practical and moral. …

The philosophy of socialism is grounded in the idea that to own personal property is to steal it from everyone else. As I have been posting for the past weeks, the real founder of socialism/communism was Jean-Jacques Rousseau (not Karl Marx), as he first popularized the idea that personal property does not exist.

In the eyes of Rousseau, Marx, and many people today, the way to create an equitable society (in other words, one where different people receive different things based on their particular situation, in order to elevate everyone to the same status), is to do away with the…

I’m not sure how many Pro-Palestinians have actually been to Palestine, but I will say that the surest way to become Pro-Israel is to visit the West Bank.

I did a tour of Israel a year ago, much of which was spent in the West Bank. The West Bank was like nothing I have ever seen before. Once, for example, our bus was driving along the edge of a valley (or, as the Israelis call it, a wadi), and there was a Palestinian village on the opposite slope. You couldn’t see the slope itself, because it was blanketed in a…

In his book The Social Contract, 17th-century British philosopher John Locke talked about how society came about (as you can read in my previous posts). Contrary to modern philosophers, he argued that people will come together into societies naturally, that everyone has a fundamental idea of private property, and that trade, money, and government came about once the society settled down and began to claim and build on its own land.

I would like to focus on the idea of private property, because all of modern philosophy turns on that idea: its reality is the sole difference between communism and…

Last time, I wrote about how Jean-Jacques Rousseau was the true predecessor of communism. His view on society was that man is naturally solitary, the first societies had no concept of personal property, and that when someone thought up the idea of declaring property his own, he was oppressing everyone else.

I stopped there, but neglected to mention why Rousseau is wrong or why John Locke had already come to the correct conclusion. So now I’ll talk about that.

In John Locke’s view, people will come together into societies naturally (as anyone who lived through the Great Lockdown of 2020…

Last time, I wrote about the State of Nature according to Jean-Jacques Rousseau (that man is naturally solitary) and according to John Locke (that people will come together into societies naturally). Anyone who lived through the Great Lockdown of 2020 has seen why Rousseau is wrong, and why people require society.

I don’t know why people paid attention to Rousseau’s arguments after his obviously flawed State of Nature argument, but they did, and Rousseau’s arguments were the direct predecessor of Karl Marx’s.

After his State of Nature argument (that man is naturally solitary), Rousseau goes on to explain how and…

I have written previously about Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and how he foolishly said that man is naturally solitary and would be much happier if civilization had never happened.

Rousseau was writing in response to a question given a hundred years earlier by Thomas Hobbes. The question is known as the “State of Nature” question, and it goes: what would man be like without education or civilization?

Three major people have answered this question: Hobbes, John Locke, and Rousseau, and in this piece, I shall begin to prove that Locke’s answer is the correct one.

Hobbes’ answer is interesting, but is sadly…

This past week, I’ve been writing about the difference between modern environmentalism (which seeks to degrade mankind to the position of animals), and sustainability (an ancient, Biblical concept that enriches both mankind and nature).

Do we need to be sustainable? Of course; that’s what God commands us to do.

Should we combat pollution? Sure; everyone hates smog.

Should we follow the advice of destroying human lives and civilization to decrease our “carbon footprint”? Of course not.

Destroying human lives is what many environmentalists are currently doing (see the California brownouts), and it’s suicidal. Preserving nature does not require we destroy…