My NFL/National Anthem Protest Thoughts

because everyone wants my two cents....

1.       I would not use this avenue for a protest.

2.       But other people can do so if they so choose.

3.       Many on the right who are so offended really should understand what the US military actually does.  Hint – it isn’t the huge peace bearing organization you think it is.  (See earlier posts!)

4.       Why would I care what the players in the NFL think about politics?  I don’t ask a priest about economics or politics.

5.       I don’t really understand the absolute outrage of people on the right.  It just doesn’t piss me off the way it seems to piss off so many others.  I can’t be bothered to be annoyed by people with such limited ideas. 

6.       What specifically are the NFL players protesting?  Institutional racism?  Bogus.  Capitalism? Bogus.  Wrongful deaths of black victims by cops?  Perhaps, but don’t limit wrongful killings to color of skin.  It happens to whites as well.  

7.       There are plenty of reasons to protest  - wars, the welfare state, militarized police, civil asset forfeiture, or the role of government in general.  Read this blog and you will find many valid reasons to protest.

8.       People on the left need to stop saying, “Trump is wrong.” He didn’t threaten using force, and he even implied it is the decision of the owners to do as they please with their organization.  He may be STUPID but he simply gave an opinion and is entitled to do so.

9.       I suspect the majority of NFL owners would rather the players didn’t kneel but they know that in today’s day and age you cannot be anything other than a social justice warrior or ESPN and the rest of the lunatic left will accuse you of being a NAZI.

1.   Roger Goodell is a bad person, a bad leader and a bad face of the NFL.  Several issues have come up during his tenure and I haven’t seen him handle any correctly.  Admittedly I don’t follow this closely but: 1) he seems to promote domestic violence (and then do a 180 and presume guilt until proven innocent and 2) he appears to discriminate against the Patriots unfairly.  Note I am a 3^rd party observer here.  I don’t have much a care for anything NFL so my opinion may be wrong but it isn’t necessarily biased one way or another.

Irony

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/image-of-the-day-hillarys-illustrated-foreign-policy-experience/

This is what interventionist foreign policy looks like.

“Once the most prosperous country in the Maghreb under the eccentric Colonel Gadaffi (yes, he was a tinpot dictator and his hands were by no means clean), it has been turned into rubble amid a civil war between a tiny Western-supported government, various military factions and fundamentalist Islamists in the wake of the intervention Ms. Clinton wholeheartedly supported.”

https://fee.org/articles/the-nuclear-war-that-almost-was-and-the-man-who-prevented-it/

This is why nuclear brinksmanship is SOOO dangerous.  One false positive and the world ends.

After a false positive while monitoring of nuclear monitoring in 1983, the Russian waited for confirmation:

If Petrov had simply sounded the alarm for his superiors, as he was trained and ordered to do, there is a good chance counterstrikes would have been launched on behalf of the USSR and the world may not be as it is today.

Fast forward to today:

The escalation between the United States and North Korea builds by the day. As each president continues to taunt the other, either by showing off military might or dishing out childish insults, the world gets closer to the possibility of nuclear war: one that could also involve the nuclear arsenals of China, even Russia. Unlike Petrov, neither world leader has taken a moment to fully think this through. A nuclear war is in absolutely no one’s interest.

http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2017/09/isnt-it-ironic.html

Read this one for an accurate, yet sad interpretation of certain quotes in the most recent Trump speech to the UN.

Oppressive regimes cannot endure forever…

We can only hope.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/no_author/entire-volume-of-cia-files-on-lee-harvey-oswald-set-to-be-released-in-october-has-gone-missing/

Imagine that, the JFK files go missing mere months before they are set to be released …

Alexander Hamilton - My Least Favorite Founding Father

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/thomas-dilorenzo/americas-hamiltonian-empire-of-lies/

An absolutely scathing piece on Alexander Hamilton.  The Founding Father of the monopolist rule of the federal government, national level court decisions, the Civil War and the Federal Reserve.  Hard to imagine one man creating more destruction with his horrid interpretation of the Constitution.

Who Works for Whom

AV à  I hate the term “the thin blue line.”  It implies that without these public servants (that we are FORCED to pay via the THEFT of our earnings called taxes) America would turn into something akin to the Purge movie.  How ludicrous.  Private defense corporations and police forces would immediately pop up and expand.  Realize that they already exist and already provide more security than the public police. 

For what it is worth I don’t have an opinion on this recent police shooting trial in St. Louis.  The plaintiff seems to be a bad guy.  But it is certainly plausible that the cop planted the gun, and I unfortunately wouldn’t be surprised at all if that were the case.

Some will claim the police work for me, the taxpayer.  Yes, I agree that you (and I) pay taxes (at least most of us do!)  But I vehemently oppose the logic that because we pay taxes, the public service providers work for us.  No.  We are all forced to pay taxes. Bureaucrats decide where and how those tax dollars are spent, NOT US.  Think of it the way Dave Smith suggests in his comedy special Libertas. Paying taxes is like getting mugged on the street and then claiming that the guy who mugged you now works for you.  In reality, you work for them! 

We the people make things, we provide services, we grow the economy, and we provide economic value for other people.  With the value we have created, government comes and steals a portion of it.  Sometimes up to 40% or so.  Hence, paying taxes IS like getting mugged. Biggest difference is the taxpayers they have been so mind-f****d by the MAN that they think the police work for them.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/no_author/never-forget-the-us-government-has-a-known-history-of-using-false-flags-2/

“… Americans are basically good people who generally want what’s best for the world. If they weren’t, the unelected power establishment which rules over them wouldn’t have to keep making up lies about babies in incubators and protecting their family from Weapons of Mass Destruction in order to secure US hegemony. If they ever told the public the truth, they’d be dealing with hundreds of millions of heavily-armed Americans telling them to get their sociopathic asses out of here.”

I am not a 9/11 denier, but I’m not entirely a believer either.  I am simply reminded that the US government has repeatedly falsified evidence in order to justify the use of military might.  Read the few examples described in the article.  Remember when the Syrians supposedly used chemical weapons to gas civilians earlier in 2017.  The incident was later identified as being perpetrated by ISIS to prod a US response to the Assad regime.

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/09/sorority-rush-consultants-new-service-sector-jobs.html

Markets are at work in everything.  A consultant charges fee to help college girls get the best sorority bid they can.

Constitution Day

http://blog.independent.org/2017/09/17/national-idolatry-and-constitution-day/

“Rather than bow down and venerate the Constitution on September 17, Americans should dust off the Articles of Confederation and study the handiwork of the Continental Congress. In it they will find a plan of government that makes liberty the primary object of government and power serving as a mere satellite.”

Why would we blindly celebrate the Constitution?  Maybe we should try following it first.  If you don’t see that 95% of what the government does is unconstitutional (including Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security and Wars and spying) then you should spend a few moments reading the document as well as the Federalist papers that were written by the same people. 

Wake Up America, We Are Drowning In Debt

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/jim-quinn/swindling-futurity/

I’m finding it difficult to choose a quote to reprint here so I highly advise you read the whole post. This is 100% true, scary and a major issue.

“Those in power pretend near zero interest rates eight years after the recession was supposedly over is normal. They pretend $500 billion to $1.4 trillion annual deficits are normal. They pretend 20% unemployment is really 4.4%. They pretend the stock market is at all-time highs due to an improving economy rather than central bank easy money and corporate stock buybacks. They pretend $20 trillion of debt and $200 trillion of unfunded welfare promises is no problem. We are living in the grand delusion.”

Get over your transgender and statue-removing complaints. Unsustainable debt and annual deficits are THE true issues of our time.

The Reason I Advocate For the Right to Price Gouge

http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/13/russia-story-says-deep-state-trump/

Read this excellent piece from a conservative site about the deep state and neoconservative foreign policy that is in no way conservative.  

“The founders didn’t envision a CIA, let alone a national police force. Just for example, the FBI was only made necessary when the federal government dramatically expanded in size and scope due to Prohibition, which only was made necessary when Americans decided to turn to government, not to the church and civil society, to remedy the country’s ills.

The point is that the intelligence bureaucracy will always be politicized, as long as it is endowed with such immense power. The deep state shouldn’t just be brought to heel under President Trump’s authority, its size and scope should be reduced so that no president can wield its current accumulation of power.”

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/comes-first-cart-horse-horse/

I copy this post as a quick reminder from Dr. Block on Say’s Law

“From: R
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 1:44 PM
To: Walter Block
Subject: Re: Austrian Economics

Hi, I have a doubt in economics which I got after reading the Atlas shrugged by Ayn Rand. I would be highly obliged if you could help me with this query:-Causality is an irreversible absolute. One cannot eat a cake before he bakes it. Therefore production is the cause and consumption is the effect. In any Credit transaction we consume before we produce which is a reversal of causality. Therefore any form of credit should not exist. Where am I going wrong in my thinking? R

Dear R: You say this: ‘In any Credit transaction we consume before we produce which is a reversal of causality.’ This is false. A correct statement would be, ‘When we borrow, we consume before we produce which is a reversal of causality.’ But in a credit transaction, there are TWO sides. The borrower and the lender. Before the borrower can consumer, the lender had to produce. So, production always comes before consumption. No exceptions.”

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/laurence-m-vance/price-gouging-property-rights/

Three important takeaways from this article:

·         “The economics of price gouging is simple. Price gouging is simply charging market prices for goods that are in high demand and short supply. Natural disasters don’t negate economic laws.”

·         “For the government to try and calculate how much prices should be allowed to rise on certain goods before, during, and after a natural disaster is pure Soviet-style central planning. Price-gouging laws are contrary the free market, free enterprise, and freedom itself.”

·         “Price-gouging laws grossly violate property rights.”

I am with Laurence Vance. Price gouging is good. Absolutely everything about it is good.  It allocates resources better, conveys scarcity better, and creates incentives for increased supply better than any other system of allocation.  While these are all good reasons supporting price gouging, none is stronger than the moral reason for it.  It is the only decision that respects property rights.  Telling me what I can and cannot do with my property (keep in mind that this ultimately ends with the threat of being thrown in a cage if I don’t comply) is completely and utterly immoral and we should never force someone to do something.  Hence, I support allowing price gouging and find anyone that doesn’t contemptible.

I also like the conclusion of this post:

“None of this means that raising prices on essential goods in the midst of a natural disaster is always moral, just, and right. But that is a matter of conscience, religion, and ethics, not law.”

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/phil-giraldi/remove-offensive-monuments/

I concur with Phil Giraldi.  I am offended by libraries dedicated to presidents in general, and specifically to the last two idiots that oversaw the executive branch.

“If we really think we can eradicate evil in our country by destroying anything symbolic or plausibly linked to the bad old days, then let’s get those bulldozers rolling. Bill, Barack and W can kiss their libraries goodbye, though I am still wondering what to do with the associated think tanks. Just imagine what a George W. Bush think tank must look like. Good grief!”

Hayek and the Security of a Social Safety Net

https://www.fed-soc.org/blog/detail/aba-watch-unconstitutional-and-blatantly-political-model-rule-84g

The ABA’s main function is no doubt as an interest group.  This has been obvious for decades.  Yet the ABA remains as a government created monopoly on lawyers.  Give me a break

“In recent decades the ABA has repeatedly departed from its proper, politically neutral task of promoting the rule of law and the sound administration of justice and taken partisan stances on controversial political issues. Of course, a private organization may do this, but then it should not be treated as an apolitical representative of the entire legal profession entitled to quasi-governmental status. It is time to treat the ABA as an interest group like any other.”

https://www.fff.org/2017/09/12/irans-war-booze-like-americas-war-drugs/

Hornberger makes the important point:

“While it’s easy for many Americans to recognize tyranny when it is committed by foreign regimes, it is much more difficult for them to recognize tyranny when it is committed by their own government. But tyranny is tyranny, whether it involves punishing people for booze or drugs and regardless of the particular regime that is doing the punishing.”

Iran bans the production, sale and use of alcohol prohibition.   Seems ludicrous to us, but we did it during Prohibition, AND we currently prohibit other drugs.  We have even waged our War on Drugs for decades.  Both Iran and the U.S impose government tyranny in restricting individual freedom to consume alcohol/drugs. We can go further and debate the other costs and benefits of legalizing these vices.  But regardless, legalizing drugs is the only moral path in keeping with our individual rights.  Anything less is tyranny.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/martin-armstrong/ruthless-federal-judges/

Scary stuff here:

“Sure, we may have no sympathy for this particular issue. However, the precedent is set and they can do this to you for taxes. The government can claim you have an account in Bangladesh and you say you do not. The judge then throws you in prison for life until you tell them the location of something that may not even exist. They need not prove anything anymore, they rely on the judge claiming he has inherent power to effectively kill you. What next – off with your head?”

AV à An excellent quote from Hayek in The Road to Serfdom:

“Thus, the more we try to provide full security by interfering with the market system, the greater the insecurity becomes; and, what is worse, the greater becomes the contrast between the security of those to whom it is granted as a privilege and the ever-increasing insecurity of the under-privileged And the more security becomes a privilege, and the greater the danger to those excluded from it, the higher will security be prized. As the number of the privileged increases and the difference between their security and the insecurity of the others increases, a completely new set of social values gradually arises. It is no longer independence but security which gives rank and status, the certain right to a pension more than confidence in his making good which makes a young man eligible for marriage, while insecurity becomes the dreaded state of the pariah in which those who in their youth have been refused admission to the haven of a salaried position remain for life.”

Allow me to explain a bit.  One major assumption Hayek makes in this quote is that security (in wages, occupation etc) cannot exist for everyone at all times.  This is tantamount to socialism, which cannot work for a plethora of reasons of which I will not explain here – other than what follows.  The crucial lapse ensuring the failure of socialism is that, absent free markets, no one can know what the price of goods/services should be in order to use resources to help the most people.

It is helpful to think of this quote from Hayek in terms of an economic pie with two pieces – 1) those with security and 2) those without security (in job, wages, income, and lifestyle.)  When we guarantee the income of some, the pie, by definition, becomes proportionately fixed in size.  We limit creative destruction in this segment/area of the economy and we reduce the number of entrepreneurs.   (By contrast, in an economy in which nobody has absolute security, everybody must become an entrepreneur in the sense of always positioning him or herself to provide the most value to the most people.)    Furthermore, the current portion of the pie taken by people with security leaves behind a relatively smaller piece of the pie with which others without security can possibly find jobs, income and added value opportunities. 

The point of Hayek’s quote is that this division between the secure and the un-secure will continue to create divisions in society.  The divisions will yield power to politicians who give security to more groups.  The irony is by giving these groups more security we limit opportunities for others within the existing economy.  And we limit the future growth of the economy. 

This phenomenon most certainly becomes a death spiral, and is impetus almost always comes from government.  This spiral ultimately must end in a revolution.  We are yet to see the revolution but I venture to say it won’t be pretty.  Perhaps this is one meaning of Hayek’s brilliant phrase, “The Road to Serfdom.”

http://cafehayek.com/2017/09/43489.html

Don Boudreaux’s excellent quote of the day from James Mill’s Elements of Political Economy:

 “The benefit which is derived from exchanging one commodity for another, arises, in all cases, from the commodity received, not from the commodity given.  When one country exchanges, in other words, when one country traffics with another, the whole of its advantage consists in the commodities imported.  It benefits by the importation, and by nothing else.”

And yet the moron in the White House wants to stop China from giving us free stuff on grounds of dumping.  I feel like I am living in a time in which we cannot see the most obvious of points.  Imports are good.  We have a trade deficit, precisely a good thing.  People send us a lot of stuff to use and enjoy.

http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com/archives/cops-are-making-out-like-bandits-actually-better-than-bandits

Civil asset forfeiture is absolutely, positively 100% not acceptable.  This is inhumane.  This is unconstitutional.  This is evil.  This cannot be allowed to continue.  Props to the guy who filmed this video and raised tens of thousands of dollars for the hot dog vendor.  I hope this officer is fired immediately. 

Capitalism - The Greatest System in the World

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2017/09/thaler_on_price.html

“But what price gouging does, as Don Boudreaux points out, is cause people far from the crisis spot to pitch in by temporarily foregoing buying the water, plywood, etc. that, due to price gouging, are priced higher even outside the directly affected area.”

I hear and read many Americans expressing distaste for capitalism.  Democrats hate it. Republicans claim to like it, but secretly don’t (also known as Republican In Name Only). And libertarians claim capitalism to be imperfect, yet they acknowledge it’s the best we have. 

I fancy the Libertarian view more than the other two.   But I’ll say this until the day I die: “Capitalism is precisely a perfect system.”  Those who deny this truth simply do not understand the beauty of entrepreneurship, the knowledge that prices convey, spontaneous order and incentives.  If you understand these four things you will agree that capitalism is not ‘”cold” or “heartless’ or any other verbal cheap shot. Instead, capitalism is an amazing and beautiful system, which allocates resources where they provide the most benefit to society.  It allows for the maximum number of people to be “well off.”  It requires that you must provide value to someone else in order to be compensated.  It does NOT include taking by force (which, not coincidentally, is all that government is).

We must flip the script.  Capitalism is not only the best we have. Capitalism provides an amazing system that will endure forever as the best system in a world of people with unlimited desires and potentials.  Social suffering in our world stems always and everywhere from government interference, be it fascism, socialism, crony monarchs or crony US presidents.

Given even a moderate acceptance of the principles and benefits of capitalism, Federal government spending could be reduced by 99.9%, allowing free markets to function to solve most, if not all, concerns.  The remaining $4.5 million Federal budget would be laser focused on efforts to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” (US Constitution)

Even so, I still claim the $4.5 million is too much.

http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2017/09/do-you-hate-state-and-if-so-why.html

Read this excellent blog post on hating the State.  Do you hate it in an abstract manner or in its specific oppressive functions?  I think I agree with the majority of this post. 

Human Rights

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/socialists-right-secede-yes-even/

Dr. Block hits the nail on the head.  The core premise of libertarianism is the right self which includes the right to associate (or not!) with whomever.  This includes the right to secede peacefully.  This right applies to all people, all ethnicities, all races, all cultures, all religions, and all political viewpoints.  Even though socialists don’t grant anyone rights of their own, we still have to respect the rights of people that freely choose to form a socialistic utopian nightmare.  Every single time.  We should not only accept secession but encourage it, both from the Christian conservative style in Texas as well as the socialistic morons in California.  Let people associate freely as they choose.  It is truly the only moral way to live. The left-libertarians are wrong on this in their attempt at a libertarian Utopian world.  It cannot work in this world.  We must strive to independence and allow others to do as they wish.

The Greatest Thinker in History?

Murray Rothbard in my opinion.


https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/jeff-deist/an-uncompromising-optimist/

Less Regulation Less Deaths from Natural Disaster

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/walter-e-block/govt-wont-protect-protect-us-storms/

Government cannot save us from storms.  The free market can do the best job of enabling the best and strongest buildings built in the best geographic locations for the cheapest prices and will be ensured the best to ensure everyone in society can get through this natural disaster with the least pain and suffering possible.  Walter Block says it here, "It cannot be denied that this great city of Texas is one of the least governed of all major cities. Indeed, for many years it had virtually no zoning regulations at all, and even nowadays they are fewer and more far between and significantly less onerous than in many other cities, Texas included. To this statement I have two comments. First, the deaths from Katrina in New Orleans and surrounding territories was in the neighborhood of 1,900. So far, as of this writing, those from Houston are at 38. Don’t get me wrong. Every one of those 38 lives was precious. Many, most of them, could have been saved if Houston had less central planning, and more free enterprise. But when you compare 1,900 and 38, we are talking about the difference between developed and undeveloped economies. Second, people like this who trash Houston’s (relative) support of free enterprise should read the monumental works of Bernie Siegan, our point man on free enterprise in Houston:

Siegan, Bernard H. 1970. “Non-Zoning in Houston,” Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. XIII, No. 1, April;

Siegan, Bernard. 1972. Land Use Without Zoning, Lexington MA: Heath.

On RICO and watermelon environmentalists:

Parker, 2015; Kasper, 2015; Moran, 2015; Bastasch, 2015; Barillas, 2015; Driessen, 2017

Parker, Bruce. 2015. “Vermont climate scientist wants RICO prosecutions of climate change opponents.” September 24;

Kasper, Matthew. 2015. “Roy Spencer, Climate Skeptic, wants RICO Investigation of Environmentalists.” November 9

Moran, Rick. 2015. “Some scientists want to prosecute global warming skeptics under the RICO Act.” September 20

Bastasch, Michael. 2015. “Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics.” September 17

Barillas, Martin. 2015. “Environmentalists seek shut-down of Catholic climate debate.” June 3;

Driessen, Paul. 2017. “The Ignorance, Intolerance, and Violence of the ‘Climate Crusaders.’”May 2;

On Katrina:

Anderson, 2005; Block, 2005A, 2005B, 2005C, 2006A, 2006B; Block and Rockwell, 2007; Chamlee-Wright and Rothschild, 2007; Cowen, 2006; Culpepper and Block, 2008; Lora, 2006; Murphy, 2005; Rockwell and Block, 2010; Thornton, 1999; Vuk, 2006A, 2006B

Anderson, William. 2005. “Katrina and the Never-Ending Scandal of State Management,” September, 13;

Block, Walter E. 2005A. “Then Katrina Came.” September 3,

Block, Walter E. 2005B. “The Answer to Katrina.” September 11.

Block, Walter E. 2005C. “Government and the Katrina Crisis.” The Free Market. Vol. 26, No. 10, October;

Block, Walter E. 2006A. “Katrina: Private Enterprise, the Dead Hand of the Past, and Weather Socialism; An Analysis in Economic Geography.” Ethics, Place and Environment: A Journal of Philosophy & Geography; Vol. 9, No. 2, June, pp. 231-241; reprinted in ‘Post-Katrina: Risk Assessment, Economic Analysis and Social Implications’– edited by Harry Richardson, Peter Gordon and James Moore. Edward Elgar Publishing;

Block, Walter E. 2006B. Interview: November 1, 2006. New Orleans, LA. Access Television, channel 76. W.C. Johnson Show Our Story. “Katrina and the aftermath.”

Block, Walter and Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. 2007. “Katrina and the Future of New Orleans,” Telos, Vol. 139, Summer, pp. 170-185

Chamlee-Wright, Emily and Daniel Rothschild. 2007. “Disastrous Uncertainty:

How Government Disaster Policy Undermines Community Rebound,” Mercatus Center

Cowen, Tyler. 2006. “An Economist Visits New Orleans: Bienvenido, Nuevo Orleans” April 19;

Culpepper, Dreda and Walter E. Block. 2008. “Price Gouging in the Katrina Aftermath.” International Journal of Social Economics; Vol. 35, No. 7, pp. 512-520;

Lora, Manuel. 2006. “What Happened to Katrina Aid? “ March 3;

Murphy, Robert P. 2005. “How the Market Might Have Handled Katrina” November 17.

Rockwell, Jr., Llewellyn H. and Walter E. Block. 2010. “The Economics and Ethics of Hurricane Katrina,” American Journal of Economics and Sociology.  Vol. 69, No. 4, October, pp. 1294-1320

Thornton, Mark. 1999. “The Government’s Great Flood.” September, Volume 17, Number 9;

Vuk, Vedran. 2006A. “Journalism and Underwater Basket Weaving” June 21.

Vuk, Vedran. 2006B. “Socialist Man in the Big Easy.” September 25."

"No Farzer Credit Expansion"

https://mises.org/blog/program-stabilize-economy%E2%80%94-four-words

Words spoken by the German speaking Ludwig Von Mises.  If you are worried about the economy, I have two pieces of news, one very good and one very bad.

Bad - We will suffer in getting back to normal.  The bust is the consequences of the irrational growth we have seen from money printing.  It is precisely a good thing but it will be painful for many.

Good - We know why the economy is not stable and can make it stable and just.  Abolish the federal reserve and the economy will prosper.



BTW it wouldn't hurt if we abolished all wars and stopped taxing people at all.  If we did just those things we would see this country prosper like has never been seen in history.