From Hollywood, the Screen Directors Playhouse. Screen Directors Playhouse star Joseph Cotton, production Love Letters, director William Dieterly. Here's a presented tale for the romantic heart. Love Letters, starring Joseph Cotton in his original role of Alan Quinton. Italy, the war. I didn't really hear the explosion, a German shell slamming into a squad of British infantry. I didn't hear it, but as my body lifted, I knew that perhaps I was going to die. And for an instant, I saw a face I'd never seen and heard a voice I'd never heard. In that instant, when my soul stretched out before me, I knew my love for Victoria. We had never met, but I loved her. And then the darkness came, and the world was dressed in darkness. Your bandages are dressed for another day, Captain Quinton. Thank you, nurse. Now I have a surprise for you. A letter from your mother and father. It's very nice. Don't you want to read it? You read it to me. Very well. Our dearest son, this marks the fourth week since you were wounded, and we both hope and pray... Letter from home, sweet consoling, and so very, very useless. Wouldn't be nice to receive a letter from Victoria. I'd written her so many and she never knew. Love letters and the officer's club in Rome. And Roger Moorland. Good Lord, Elin, you look as if you're writing a last will and testament. Do I, Roger? Look, you're writing my letter over my name to my girl.  All right, Roger. Victoria, I think of you, my dearest. There's a distant promise of beauty untouched by the world. If I never see you again. Well, go on. Roger, I'm sorry we ever started this business. Nonsense. If I'm awkward at love letters, why shouldn't you write them for me? Perhaps she's falling in love with them, Roger. Victoria is in love with me. We met at a dance in England. She knows me well enough.  I won't go on with it. Oh, don't tell me you've fallen for her yourself, Elin. Are you in love with her? Oh, don't be stuffy. Besides, if you're so righteous, why did you start writing her in the first place? There's an escape, I suppose. I wrote her all the things I could never say to any other woman. I wanted to say them to an unknown girl who wouldn't care. And you did. But Victoria has cared. But last letter, Roger, give it to me. Roger, here it is. Listen, my darling, thank you for seeing life, not as a burden or a punishment, but as a dream of beauty, which we can make real. It is terrible waiting for you, but finding you was such a miracle that anything I suffered seems only a small payment in return. Oh, very pretty, but senseless. Roger, don't you see she loves a man who doesn't exist.  Meanwhile, sign my name to the letter and I'll never trouble you again. Word of honor. Right. Here's an end to it, then. Don't forget the address. Ms. Victoria Remington, Meadow Farm, Essex, England. Meadow Farm. Once I live near there, Roger, with an aunt, a belt march. Very interesting. Do I have the letter? Here it is. Thank you. Seems a pity to bother mailing it when I'll be seeing her in a few days. What'd you say? Oh, didn't I tell you? They're sending me back to England for training. Roger, don't go to see her. Sorry, Captain. You don't know what you'll be doing to her. Probably have a jolly good time, that's all. Well, I'm on my way. Don't stop any artillery, Alan. God help you, Roger. And God help Victoria. I'll leave you with our fondest love. Signed mother and father. Captain Quinton. Oh, yes, yes, nurse. I was just thinking. Oh, there's a post script in another hand. It's signed Roger Morland. Roger? What's he say? It says, just dropped in on your parents while on my honeymoon. Two weeks ago, Victoria and I were married. So she was Victoria Morland now. Victoria's dream of beauty. I choked back the memory of the vision that had flashed in the shellburst. For 15 months I buried it in my loneliness. 15 months of hospitals and hospitals and finally England and home. Well, dear, I do hope you're not brooding about the war. Oh, no, no, Mother. Oh, Brother Derek was a soldier, too. But you're so different. Something besides the war has changed to Alan. Brother Derek wasn't wounded, Mother. I suggest you leave us to brood together, just a couple of old soldiers. Very well, Derek. Oh, Alan, speaking of soldiers, remember the young man who came to see us when you were hurt in Italy? Roger Morland? What about him? Well, he's been dead a year. Roger? Killed in action? No, his wife did it. Oh, what was her name? She murdered him. Victoria. Oh, yes, that was it, Victoria. Alan, you look ghastly. Victoria. What happened? I don't know. Some dead for business with a knife. Victoria did not kill Roger Morland. Indeed. And who was the murderer? I was. You're sure I can't help you, Pack Alan? No, thanks, Derek. You know, I can't understand what's possessed you to leave home and take Old Aunt Dagmar's house at Belmont. She left it to me when she died, didn't she? Besides, there's a place nearby called Meadow Farm. Oh, what about it? Victoria Remington Meadow Farm. Oh, nothing, Derek, just a place. Look, Alan, how about one last fling before you leave? Party. Well, there's a girl I know named Dilly Carson. She has a flat in London. Just a few guests, and then afterwards you can hop the train to Belmont. All right, Derek, if you want. But I'm afraid I can't promise to have a good time. Well, here he is, Dilly, my redoubtable brother, Alan Gwinton. Hello, Alan.  Hello, Dilly. Come along. I'll introduce you to my creatures. This is Janet Campbell. Hello. And Jean Foley. Oh, Jean. And this is Singleton, my roommate. I'm very glad to meet you. Oh, those devils are breaking my best glasses. Quite scintillating, isn't she? What's your name? I'm Alan Quinton, and you're Singleton. That's your first name or your last one? Oh, it's the only name I have. Well, that is strange. Not really. One name is five. You know Singleton. I think we've met before. Have we? Sounds ridiculous, but it seems we met on the battlefront overseas. Oh, no. I've never been on a battlefront. Here, Alan, I've brought you a drink. Thank you, Dilly. I said, do you mind if I get drunk? Well, just remember we rent the furniture. Unhappy, Alan? Yes, I haven't had a drink since... Well, cheers. Pass me the bottle, Dilly. Here you are, my bunny. Where's Singleton, Dilly? She's gone, Alan. It's very beautiful. Once, once there was a girl. Her name was Victoria. Victoria Morland. Dilly, I've done an unspeakable thing. I wrote some letters, and Roger died. And Victoria... Oh, I don't know, Dilly. I don't know. Always a dream of beauty, and... Victoria! Alan, you've been talking to yourself for the past half hour. Dilly? Yes. Where's Singleton? They've all left, Alan. I'll have to get your tray. I'll take you to the station. But first, Alan, listen to me. I don't know what strange trick of fortune brought you here, but I know the truth about Victoria Morland. Dilly, I'm back. You're still here. Hello, Singleton. Dilly, where is Victoria Morland? No, Alan, I don't want to talk about it. Victoria Morland? Is she a friend of ours, Dilly? No, no, Singleton, you don't know her. Dilly, you said you'd... But you must have misunderstood. Whoever she is, Alan, you're in love with her. Yes, I am. How did you know? Who are you talking about tonight? Have you lost her, Alan? Yes. Then perhaps I can help you find her. But why?  Singleton, I'm taking Alan to the station. Good night, Singleton. Good night. I hope you find her. And Alan, please come back soon. Well, goodbye. Dilly. Yes? Why didn't you want me to talk about Victoria in front of Singleton? Alan, Victoria's dead. Dad. In a manner of speaking, her... her power to remember is dead. Her past is dead. And so, although her body lives on under a different name, the old Victoria's really gone. A different name? Tell me, Dilly, who is Victoria Morland? Her name now is Singleton. Are you surprised, Alan? No. No, I think I knew. She was the girl in the shellburst. I felt it like the shedding of an awful wound. Oh, thank you, Dilly. Thank you. I found her. I found Victoria. The first thing to the Screen Directors Playhouse production of Love Letters, starring Joseph Cotton in his original role with Barbara Eiler as Singleton. Singleton was Victoria Morland. Victoria, whom I knew only through our love letters. But now, knowing her, having found her, my dream, the dream of beauty, fluttered in my hand. Then as Dilly Carson and I talked at the station, there's so much I want to ask Dilly, so many questions. Victoria was a farmling who had been given the name of Victoria Singleton. But she was adopted by Beatrice Remington, a lonely old mate who lived at Meadow Farm. I was raised near there. Beatrice Remington loved the child, bringing her up as a kind of idol, guarding her from the hurt of the world. And then she met Roger Morland and fell in love with those letters. I know. My letters. Beatrice objected, but they eloped. And Singleton became the unhappiest girl I've ever known. Then she... she really killed him. I was at home for the weekend when a laborer from Meadow Farm came and told me that something terrible had happened. Roger had been drinking. He tried to burn her letters. Beatrice Singleton was there. She saw it all, but the shock had brought on a stroke and the old lady couldn't speak. The last words she said were to me. She told me that Roger had struck Victoria. She... she tried to tell me more, but the stroke had paralyzed her. And Victoria?  Roger was dead. And so was Victoria's memory. A merciful amnesia had blotted out the past. She didn't know me. What about the police? She was found guilty of manslaughter, sentenced to a few months in prison. Now, even the memory of that has faded. Everything is gone, Alan. All she remembers is the orphanage and the name they gave her there, Singleton. She remembers you? Only because I visited her regularly. Afterwards, I brought her to live with me. And Beatrice Remington? She's in a rest home. She can speak now, but the doctors have forbidden her to see Victoria. No one can ever talk of the past. You see, if Victoria's memory should return abruptly, she might lose her mind completely. I see. Deli, you know who the real criminal is. You're the man she loves. The man she thought she'd married. But she doesn't know it. And you can never tell her.  All right, Deli. She'll want to see you again, Alan. What shall I tell her? Tell her I'm in love with Victoria Marlon. As a child, I had never liked Belmarsh. But now I gloried in its solitude. I wanted to be alone. First to think, and then, then not to think. All I had of Victoria was an aching memory and the sight of her house at Meadow Farm. One evening, when I returned home from the war, Singleton, what are you doing here? I came to see you. Deli doesn't know. I must be worried to death. I'm taking you back to London on the next train here.  Now, why did you come here? Because you didn't come to see me. Oh, it's quite all right, because I know you're in love with a girl named Victoria Marlon. Well, how did you know my address? Her brother Derek spoke of it at the party. You have a good memory, Singleton. Oh, I... It's all right, Alan. I know I have no memory. I told you. Is that why you're afraid of me? No.  In fact, since the war, you're the first person with whom I felt at peace. Then you'll come to see me, Alan, in London? Of course I will. But don't write me about it. That's something I'm afraid of. It frightens me to receive a letter. Why does it frighten you? Maybe it's because I can't write. I've forgotten. But I remember how to read. Perhaps I'll teach you how to write again. Now, I think we'd better start for the train. All right, Alan. Singleton, you've made me very happy by coming here. In your voice, in your eyes, in your heart, I've found the end of a searching that began a long time ago. You like me, Alan. But you love Victoria.  Yes. I've returned Singleton to you, but I warn you, I'll want her back. No, Alan. I want you to arrange for me to see Beatrice Remington at the rest home. Tell her everything about me. Accept the letters. Miss Remington, I love your ward with all my heart. You're proposing to marry two different women at once, Mr. Quinton. Singleton and Victoria Moreland. If her memory returned, would Singleton's consent be binding on Victoria? I've thought of those things. I think we can be happy, but I'm asking your permission before I ask Singleton. Oh, I don't want to interfere again. I did once, and I live to regret it. You don't understand. No, no, of course not. Mr. Quinton, I want my ward to be happy. If she loves you, I wish you both happiness. I brought you to the bridge, Singleton, to watch the river. Oh, it's beautiful. See how the water moves, washing away its own wake with no past, no future, just a moving present. We can be better than the river, Singleton. We can have a present and a future. I've forgotten the past, Alan, but Victoria's part of yours. Oh, that's gone, gone finished. But you'll always be looking for her. I've found my love. Oh, Alan, I love you. I love you. Singleton, will you marry me? Darling, what is it? I don't know. I knew what you were going to say. I was happy, and yet, when you said it, something happened. Something frightened me. No, no, don't singleton. Oh, Alan, there's something in my past, something horrible. There is no past. Then say it, Alan. Say it again. Will you marry me, Singleton? Oh, yes, Alan, yes, yes. We were married, Singleton and I, and went to live at Beltmaw. Shit was the happiest time of my life, and Singleton laughed and gasped at the newness of everything. But always flickering darkly across the brightness of our lives. Mrs. Quentin, you're the most beautiful creature that ever sat before a fire. More beautiful than Victoria Morland Allen. Singleton, you promised not to be afraid of her. But I'm afraid of her. Sometimes I feel as if she were here. Another person in the house waiting to take you away from me. No, darling, never. Alan, she lived near here, didn't she? Well... When I packed away your uniform, I found an envelope. Victoria Morland Meadow Farm Essex. That's just a few miles away. That was long ago, my darling. Now, what about your writing lesson? Oh, I almost forgot. I wrote you a letter today. Good. Here it is, Alan. Oh, that's fine. Let's see now. Dear Alan, there are so many things I want to thank you for. Thank you for seeing life not as a burden or a punishment, but as a dream of beauty which we have made real. Well, what's the matter? Don't you like my letter? You must write me an answer, you know. And I think of you, my dearest, as a distant promise of beauty untouched by the world. Roger. Roger wrote that to me. Singleton. His name was Roger. I loved him. Darling, darling, now. Oh, Alan, what am I saying? It's all right, Singleton. It's all right. I don't know anyone named Roger. No, no, you're upset. I'll pour you a glass of wine. There you are. Thank you, Alan. I... Oh, you spilled it. Alan, on my dress. It's blood. No, it's only wine. I had a knife in my hand. There was a fire burning. And my dress stained red. Oh, Alan, what happened? What did I do? Singleton. I'm afraid, Alan. Why do I say these things I don't understand? Singleton's vision passed, and with any memory of Victoria or Marlon, she might have recaptured. I left her asleep, exhausted, and went to London to see the one person who could help me, Beatrice Remington. I'm sorry. Miss Beatrice Remington went home a week ago. Singleton! Singleton! Where are you? Singleton! She was gone. And lying on the floor, a crumpled letter was signed Beatrice Remington. Dear Mr. Quinton, I have come back to Meadow Farm because my time is short.  And I must speak to you about her. I know that you love her as deeply as I do. That was all. And I knew that Singleton had gone to Beatrice Remington and the past. You're Beatrice Remington? Yes, my child. I'm Mrs. Quinton. I read the letter you sent my husband. You know where Victoria Marlon is. Yes, I do. I want to find her. My husband's in love with her. How do you know? He loved her once. Then something happened. He lost her. And now, now perhaps he can be happy again with her. What do you know about Victoria Marlon? I think that now, my child, you have to know. Victoria Marlon was my ward. I loved her very much, too much. I tried to make her happiness my own. And was she happy? Until her marriage. Then one night, when her husband had been drinking, he told her someone else had written his love letters. He tried to burn them. In that fireplace. Victoria tried to stop him. But he struck her. She fell back. There was a knife. I had a knife in my hand. I killed Roger. No. I'm Victoria Marlon. I killed him. He was an animal. He hit you. I took the knife. Afterwards, you held it against your dress. Aunt Beatrice? Yes. I remember. No, I know I remember. The stroke. I couldn't speak. I couldn't tell the truth in time. And when I could speak, I kept silent to protect your sanity. It was my fault. Because I loved a man who didn't exist. A man who wrote the letters. Victoria. Alan, you've heard. Victoria. If you found the man who wrote those letters, would you hate him? I don't know. Then listen, Victoria. Listen. I think of you, my dearest, as a distant promise of beauty untouched by the world. If I never see you again. Alan. Darling. Darling, can you forgive me? It was terrible waiting for you. But finding you was such a great miracle that anything I suffered seems only a small payment in return. The suffering is gone now. The past is in the past. And the future? Ours, Victoria. Ours. We'll return in just a moment. Next week, you'll relive another motion picture thrill and screen director's playhouse. The only program which always brings you the original star of your favorite film stories. Our story next week is Remember the Night. And recreating her original role will be Barbara Stanwick with green director Mitchell Lyson. Now, here again is tonight's star, Joseph Cotton. It seems that my past, present, and future are closely connected with the man who directed Love Letters. In the past, he also directed me in Portrait of Jenny, and I'll be seeing you. And in the near future, we'll be finishing another picture, September. As for the present, I'm very, very pleased to introduce you to my director, William Dieterly. Thank you, Joan. Thank you for such a beautiful performance in Love Letters. It was a pleasure to do one of our film stories in a nice, dry studio. What do you mean? Well, if you'll think back, we've had an awfully damp association. Hurricanes and sailboats in Portrait of Jenny and floundering around the Bay of Naples in September, and that horrible, wet marsh country in Love Letters. Wait till you see the script of our next picture. What is it? 20,000 leaks under the sea. Well, if I may paraphrase one of Singleton's lines, finding a director like you has been such a miracle that a few sneezes seem only a small payment in return. Thank you, Joan. Good night. Good night, everyone. And good night to you, Joseph Cotten and William Dieterly. Remember next week, Barbara Stanwick and screen director, Mitchell Lysen. Love Letters was presented through the courtesy of Hal Wallace Productions, whose current production for Paramount is My Friend Irma, starring John Lund and Diana Lin, with Marie Wilson and NBC's own Martin and Lewis. Joseph Cotten will soon be seen in the David O. Selznick presentation The Third Man. William Dieterly's forthcoming release is Bitter Victory, co-starring Robert Cummings, Lisba Scott and Diana Lin. Included in tonight's cast were Barbara Eiler, Alma Lawton, Dan O'Hurley, Norma Varden, Eleanor Audley, Ben Wright, Ruth Parrot and Dan Riss. Love Letters was adapted for radio by Richard Allen Simmons, and original music was composed and conducted by Henry Russell. Screen Directors Playhouse is produced by Howard Wiley, with dramatic production. Portions were transcribed. This is Jimmy Wallington speaking and inviting you to listen again next week when we present Screen Directors Playhouse, star Barbara Stanwick, production Remember the Night, director Mitchell Lysen There's better listening every night on NBC. Take Tuesdays for instance. Tomorrow you'll want to hear the Bob Hope Show and your favorites Fibber McGee and Molly on NBC. Tuesday also is the day to start Link Letters People Are Funny. The Cavalcade of America, Big Town and Me and Janie. For the best listening tomorrow night and every night tune to NBC. Now stay tuned for the Ethel Merman show on NBC.


e what all values my f of x is tending towards okay then we will be able to figure out that finally it is going towards which fixed value okay now suggest me certain values which are less than 1 I am sure you would suggest 0.9 first okay now tell me when x is 0.9 what is your f of x you may use this definition if you want when x is 0.9 that means it is not 1 f of x will be what 0.9 plus 1 what is that 1.9 1.9 correct shatish now you can yourself figure out what is happening when I take 0.99 what does f of x become 1.99 when I take 0.999 what does f of x become 1.999 when I take 0.99999 it becomes 1.99999 you can see yourself my dear students that as you are going slowly and slowly and slowly and slowly towards 1 this guy f of x is going slowly and slowly towards which value which value towards 2 yes towards 2 so this answer to the first part of the question is the left hand limit is 2 is there any question now with respect to evaluating the left hand limit or am I audible can you all hear me my test my test. Yeah, yeah, yeah people can hear me or something wrong with your system here. Oh, yeah, you can hear me now. Okay. Let us do a similar exercise when I am approaching one from the right side of one. So let me again make a simple column. Okay. So now I am choosing such values which are slightly higher than one and let's see what does my function approach to the first thing that I can put is 1.1. Okay. So again we can use the very same definition x plus one when x is not equal to one because 1.1 is not equal to one. So I can put x as one 1.1 and I'll get 2.1. Okay. Good. So I'll put 2.1 here. Now still further close the gap. See my role is to move towards one. So I'm closing the gap. So from point one gap I'm making it point zero one gap. Now my function will become 2.01 again. I'm still closing the gap. I'm still getting closer to a fixed value C and my dear as you are growing slowly and slowly towards one. This guy is again slowly and slowly moving towards which value to again. So here you see that your right hand limit is also to and are both the value same. You'll say yes both are two. So your limit will also become two. Right. So you can see that even when the function is not defined at that point even when there was a whole there. Even when there was a whole here the limit is still there. The limit is two for that it's a finite fixed value. So limit is always a finite value guys. I forgot to write this down in the first this thing. Your limit is always a finite value remember. Okay. However left hand limit and right hand limit they may be infinity or minus infinity. I will expose you to more problems. Don't worry about them right now. Yes. Yes. I'm sure it is two. I'm sure it is two. Okay. Okay. I'm just asking a question. Okay. When you're approaching zero for one by X. Now see the graph one by X graph. As you all figured out it is like this. If I approach from the left side. My left hand limit is negative infinity. If I approach from the right side of zero. My right hand limit is positive infinity. Right. Anyways negative infinity positive infinity are very very far apart. Limit does not exist. Got your question and got your answer. Okay. Now of course a natural question will arise in your mind that every time sir is giving such examples where left hand limit right hand limit are equal right. Now I will cite an example where left hand limit is not equal to right hand limit. Listen to that example. Okay. Very very nice example I'll give you. Do you remember this function gif of X. Okay. Now I'll give you an example where I'm evaluating the limit of the gif of X function. So this is now your f of X function when X sends to one. Okay. Let us do the same exercise. Let's make two columns for left hand limit and the right hand limit. Okay. Let's make two columns. One is where I will approach one from the left side and I'll see what values this gif function takes and the other in which I will approach one from the right side and then see what values my gif takes. Okay. Let's start the process. Okay. Point nine. If I put point nine in the way place of X. What does f of X give out to you. Zero point nine nine zero point nine nine nine zero. So as you can see as you're going towards one this guy has already achieved a value. That's what I was telling you a little later on. It may achieve also that value. Okay. F of X. There's no restriction but X is still moving f of X may tend to a value or achieve a value. Okay. So this is what we call as the left hand limit. So left hand limit is zero. Now let's do the same exercise when I am approaching one from the right side of one. So one point one. What is the value one one point zero one. I'm closing the gap. See this is my one. I'm trying to approach one from this side. I've already approached one from this side. I'm approaching one from the right side. What will you one point zero one gif one only one point zero one one only one point zero zero zero one one only. So as you're going towards one this is stagnated at one and that is what we call as the right hand limit. And this is the first example that you're seeing is where the limit does not exist because left hand limit is zero and right hand limit is one. So you will write D and E for it does not exist. Now I'm sure most of your questions would have been answered now one question still may be there in your mind. Sir from how close you start that question many people ask me. So let's say you're approaching one how close to one you start from for example you started from point nine over here. Could I have started it from let's say minus 10. Okay. Now the answer to that is you should start. See ultimately you're going to converge towards one. So there's no point starting from very far away. Correct. You can start from the neighborhood of that point neighborhood means very small gap here and there. Okay. And it's your call it's your call from where you want to start but ultimately doesn't matter from where you are starting. Your answer will going is going to converge any how to zero if you start from any values left to one and it's going to converge to one any how you start from right side of one. So she does a question if so one particular number exists for all values tending to a then the limit is achieved. Yes and both left hand and right hand value should be the same number. If they're different numbers limit doesn't exist. Sir can you show the previous screen because I have a question sure area why not there you go. You want me to drag it somewhere left right center. You want to see the right side of the screen or you want to see the left side of the screen or is it the position where you want to see. You want to see this guy. Yeah what question you have you can ask no need to type it out. So in the function of effects why you can't cancel X minus one. Yeah now I was not evaluating limit at that time area. I was just asking you the definition of the function in order to plot it when I'm evaluating the limit I can confidently cancel it and that is what we call as the visualization method of evaluating the limit that I will come to in some time probably next class I will talk about it. Sir is there an easier way to calculate of course there is an easier way we'll talk about it. This is called the informal approach. This is called the informal approach of evaluating the limit. Normally we are not going to evaluate any of our limit by this approach because it is too lengthy and tedious. Thankfully our functions were very you know sober. If your functions are complicated oh my God who's going to put point nine point nine nine one point one one tears will come out from my eyes. Okay. Of course there are methodologies set in to evaluate limit faster. We'll talk about it later on. So this has another question. So can we say limit is average of the not necessarily limit is a fixed value and average itself may change. There are different types of averages right. You cannot say it's an average actually LHL and RHL have to be the same shitage. Right. Even the average also come out to be the same for the same two quantities but the first and foremost essential criteria is they have to be the same. Okay. Okay. One last thing I would like to highlight just one minute or many people think I think our abhi had a question that so for all integer points this gif limit does not exist. The answer to that is no. Let's say if you evaluate the gif function X limit as X to 2.5 then it will exist and that will be two. Okay. So it's wrong to say that it is the gif function limit doesn't exist for every point. No, it will exist for extending to non integral points. Is that what you're asking our abhi for integer points. It will not exist. Okay. Well, thank you so much guys. I think I just introduced a flare of limits inside you. I'm going to share an assignment with you. You just solve the initial few questions. I think the first four or five questions I'll mention that in the on the group. Okay. And do not forget to take your logarithmic assignments on the group. Okay. Okay. So over and out from my side I am still there to answer few of your questions.


I want to talk about libertarianism and the alt-right or the alternative right and as a subtitle I have chosen in search of a libertarian strategy for social change. We all know the fate of the term liberal and liberalism. It has been affixed to so many different people and different position that it has lost all its meaning and become an empty non-descript label and the same fate I fear has now increasingly also increasingly threatens the term libertarian and libertarianism that was invented to regain some of the conceptual precision that was lost with the demise of the terms liberal and liberalism. However the history of modern libertarianism is still quite young. It began actually in Murray-Rosbard's living room and found its first quasi-canonical expression in his book for a new liberty, a libertarian manifesto, that was published in 1973. And the libertarian movement included initially no more than about ten people fitting in Murray-Rosbard's living room. And because of the young age of libertarianism I'm hopeful and not yet willing to give up the term as it has been defined and explained by Rosbard with unrivaled clarity and precision. Notwithstanding the meanwhile countless attempts of so-called libertarians to muddy the water and misappropriate a good name of libertarianism for something entirely different. The theoretical irrefutable core of the libertarian doctrine is simple and straightforward and I have explained it already repeatedly at this place. If there were no scarcity in the world, human conflicts or more precisely physical clashes would be impossible. Interpersonal conflicts are always conflicts concerning scarce things. I want to do A with a given thing and you want to do B with a very same thing. And because of such conflicts and because we are able to communicate and argue with each other, we seek out norms of behavior with the purpose of avoiding these conflicts. The purpose of norms is conflict avoidance. If we did not want to avoid conflicts, the search for norms of conduct would be senseless. We would simply fight and struggle. Now absent a perfect harmony of all interests, conflicts regarding scarce resources can only be avoided if all scarce resources are assigned as private exclusive property to some specified individual or group of individuals. Only then can I act independently with my own things from you with your own things without you and me physically clashing. But who owns what scarce resource as his private property and who does not? Now first, each person owns his physical body that only he and no one else controls directly. And second, as for scarce resources that can be controlled only indirectly, that must be appropriated with our own nature given that is unappropriated body, exclusive control or property is acquired by an assigned to that person who appropriated the resource in question first or who acquired it through voluntary and conflict free exchange from its previous owner. Because only the first appropriator of a resource and all later owners connected to him through a chain of voluntary exchanges can possibly acquire and gain control over it without conflict that is peacefully. Otherwise, if exclusive control is assigned instead to late commerce, conflict is not avoided. But contrary to the very purpose of norms made unavoidable and permanent. Now before this audience, I do not need to go into greater detail except to add this. If you want to live in peace with other people and avoid all physical clashes and if such clashes do occur, seek to resolve them peacefully, then you must be an anarchist or a proponent of a private law society or more precisely, you must be a private property anarchist and anarcho capitalist or as I said, a proponent of a private law society. And by implication then and again without much further ado, someone or anyone is not a libertarian or merely a fake libertarian who affirms and advocates one or more of the following things, for instance, the necessity of a state, any state of public or state property and of taxes in order to live in peace. Or who affirms the existence and unjustifiably, justifiability of any so-called human rights or civil rights other than private property rights such as women rights, gay rights, minority rights, the right not to be discriminated against, the right to free and unrestricted immigration which is the right to free trespassing, the right to a guaranteed minimum income or to free healthcare or the right to be free of unpleasant speech and thought. The proponents of any of this may call themselves whatever they want and as libertarians we may well cooperate with them insofar as such cooperation offers the promise of bringing us closer to our ultimate goal but they are not libertarians or only fake libertarians. Now a funny thing happened on the way to the forum, while Rothbard and I following in his footsteps never went astray from these theoretically derived core beliefs, not just non-libertarians but in particular also fake libertarians that is people claiming falsely to be libertarians and even many possibly honest yet dim-witted libertarians have selected and vilified us as their favorite bet noir and incarnates of evil.  So what funny thing has happened here? Now trying to develop an answer to this question brings me to the topic of the speech, namely the relationship between libertarianism and the alternative right or the alt-right which has gained national and international notoriety after Hillary Clinton during the last presidential election campaign identified it as one of the inspirational sources behind the basket of deplorables rooting for Trump and which I must say and emphasize which after Trump's election victory the alternative right quickly broke with Trump at least most of the people broke with Trump when it turned out that he was just another presidential warmonger. Now the alt-right movement is essentially the successor of the paleo-conservative movement that came to prominence in the early 1990s with columnist and best-selling author Patrick Buchanan as his best known representative. It went somewhat dormant by the late 1990s and it has recently in light of the steadily growing damage done to America and its reputation by the successive Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2 and Obama administration. It has reemerged more vigorous than before under the new label of alt-right. Many of the leading lights associated with the alt-right have appeared here at our meetings in the course of the years. Paul Gottfried who first coined the term Peter Brimelow, Richard Lynn, Jared Taylor, John Derbyshire, Steve Seiler and Richard Spencer as well Sean Gabb's name is occasionally associated with and my name is also regularly mentioned in connection with the alt-right. And my work has also been linked also with the closely related neo-reactionary movement inspired by Curtis Jarvin who I also personally know and who wrote under the pen name Mencius Moldbug and his now defunct blog Unqualified Reservations. In some these personal relations and associations have earned me several honorable mentions by America's most famous smear and defamation league the Sazan Poverty Law Center which my good friend Tom Di Lorenzo always refers to as a Soviet Poverty Lies Center. Now how about the relationship between libertarianism and the alt-right and my reasons for having invited leading representatives of the alt-right to meetings with libertarians. Libertarians are united by the irrefutable theoretical core beliefs mentioned at the outset. They are clear about the goal that they want to achieve but the libertarian doctrine does not imply much if anything concerning these two following questions. First how to maintain a libertarian order once you have achieved it and more importantly second how to attain a libertarian order from a non-libertarian starting point which requires of course on the one hand that one must correctly describe the starting point and secondly one must correctly identify the obstacles posed in the way of one's libertarian ends by this very starting point. To answer these questions in addition to theory you also need some knowledge of human psychology and sociology or at least a modicum of common sense.  They blindly accept against all empirical evidence an egalitarian blank slate view of human nature that is that all people and all societies and all cultures are essentially equal and interchangeable. Now while much of contemporary libertarianism then can be characterized as theory and theorists without psychology and sociology much or even most of the old right can be described in contrast as psychology and sociology without any theory. The old writers are not united by a commonly held theory and there exists nothing even faintly resembling a canonical text defining its meaning. Rather the old right is essentially united in its description of the contemporary world and in particular the US and the so-called Western world and the identification and diagnosis of its social pathologies. In fact it has been correctly noted that the old right is far more united by what it is against than what it is for. It is against and indeed it hates with a passion the elites in control of the state the mainstream media and academia and why because the state the mainstream media and academia all promote social degeneracy and pathology. Thus they promote and the old right vigorously opposes egalitarianism affirmative action or non-discrimination laws multiculturalism and free mass immigration as a means to bring about this multiculturalism. As well the old right looses everything smacking of cultural Marxism or Gramsciism named after Antonio Gramsci the Italian communist and they hate all political correctness and strategically wise I think it shrugs off without any apology whatsoever or accusations of being racist sexist elitist supremacist homophobic xenophobic and so on and so on and the old right also laughs off as hopelessly naive the programmatic motto of so-called libertarians such as the students for liberty which I have also termed the stupid for liberty and my young German friend Andre Lichtschlag has referred to them as the liberal libertarians and their motto of peace love and liberty which Lichtschlag appropriated translated into German as Friede Freude Eierkuchen libertarians now in stark contrast to this all the writers insist that life is also about strife hate struggle and fight not just between individuals but also among various groups of people acting in concert millennial vote those pen name guy actual name is Colin Robertson has thus I think aptly summarized the old right and I quote equality is bullshit hierarchy is essential the races are different the sexes are different morality matters and degeneracy is real all cultures are not equal and we are not obligated to think that they are men is a fallen creature and there is more to life than hollow materialism finally the white rice race matters and civilization is precious this is the old right end of quote now absent any unifying theory however there is far less agreement among the old right about the goal that it ultimately wants to achieve many of its leading lights have distinctly libertarian leanings most notably those that have come here which of course was the reason for having them invited in the first place even if they were not 100 percenters and all old writers that have appeared here for instance have been familiar with rosebard and his work all the while the most recent presidential candidate of the libertarian party in the united states had never even heard of rosebard's name and all of them those that I had here to the best of my knowledge were outspoken supporters of ron paul during his primary campaign for the republican party's nomination as presidential candidate all of them all the while many self-proclaimed libertarians attacked and tried to vilify ron paul for his supposedly and you know already what is coming racist views however several of the old rights leaders and many of its rank and file followers have also endorsed views that are incompatible with libertarianism as Buchanan before and trump now they are adamant about complimenting a policy of restrictive highly selective and discriminating immigration which is entirely compatible with libertarianism and its goal of freedom of association and the opposition to forced integration many of them propose to combine this policy with a strident policy of restricted trade economic protectionism protect and protective tariffs which is of course anti-settical to libertarianism and inimical to human prosperity let me hasten to add however here that despite my misgivings about about his economics I still consider Pat Buchanan a great man others straight even further afield such as Richard Spencer who first popularized the term old right in the meantime owing to several recent publicity stunts which have gained him some sort of notoriety in the u.s. Spencer has claimed late claim to the rank of the maximum leader of a supposedly mighty unified movement and endeavor by the way that has been ridiculed by Taki Theodore Kopoulos talking Mac who is a veteran champion of the paleo conservative term old right movement and was Spencer's former employer when Spencer appeared here several years ago he still exhibited strong libertarian leanings unfortunately however this has changed and Spencer now denounces without any qualification whatsoever all libertarians and everything libertarian and has gone so far as to even put up with socialism as long as it is socialism of and for only white people you can imagine my disappointment now given the lack of any theoretical foundation this split of the old right movement into rival factions can hardly be considered a surprise yet this fact should not mislead one to dismiss it because the old right has brought out many insights that are of central importance in approaching an answer to the two questions that I mentioned before that libertarians had traditionally difficulties answering namely of how to maintain a libertarian order and how to get to such an order from the current decidedly unlibertarian status quo the old right of course did not discover these insights they had been long long before established and indeed in large parts they are no more than common sense but in recent times such insights have been buried under mountains of egalitarian leftist propaganda and the old right must be credited at least for having brought them back to light to illustrate the importance of such insights let me take the first unanswered question first many libertarians hold the view that all that is needed to maintain a libertarian social order is a strict enforcement of the non-aggression principle otherwise as long as one abstains from aggression according to their view the principle of live and let live should hold yet surely while this live and let live sounds appealing to adolescents in rebellion against parental authority and all social convention and control and I should add many youngsters have initially been attracted to libertarian believing that this live and let live is all that libertarianism has to offer and while this principle does indeed hold and apply for people living far apart and dealing with each other only indirectly and from afar when it comes to it does not hold this principle does not hold and apply or rather it is insufficient when it comes to people living in close close proximity to each other as neighbors and cohabitants of the same community a simple example suffices to make this point assume there's all of a sudden a new next door neighbor this neighbor does not aggress against you or your property in any way but he is simply a bad neighbor he is littering on his own neighboring property turning it into a garbage heap for instance in the open for you to see he engages in ritual animal slaughter or he turns his house into a Freuden house a bordello with clients coming and going all day and all night long or he never offers a helping hand and never keeps any promises that he has made or he cannot or else he refuses to speak to you in your own language and so forth and so forth we all have experiences with what bad how bad life can become if you have bad neighbors so your life is turned into a nightmare yet you may not use violence against him because he has not against against against you now what can you do you can of course shun and ostracize him but let's say your neighbor does not care in any case you alone thus punishing him makes little if any difference to him you have to have the communal respect and authority or you must turn to someone who does have this communal authority to persuade and convince everyone or at least most of the members of your community to do likewise and make the bad neighbor a social outcast so as to exert enough pressure on him to sell his property and leave now so much for those libertarians who in addition to their live and let live motto also hail the ideal of respect no authority respect no hierarchy respect no person above you now the lesson the peaceful cohabitation of neighbors and of people in regular direct contact with each other on some territory that is a tranquil convivial social order requires also a commonality of culture of language religion custom and convention there can be peaceful coexistence of different cultures on distant physically separated territories but multiculturalism cultural heterogeneity cannot exist in one and the same place and territory without leading to diminishing social trust increased tension and ultimately the call for a strong men and the destruction of anything resembling a libertarian social order and more over just as a libertarian order must always be on guard against bad even if none aggressive neighbors by means of social ostracism that is by a common you are not welcome here culture so and indeed even more vigilantly so must it be guarded against neighbors who openly advocate communism socialism syndicalism or democracy in any shape or form these people in thereby posing an open threat to all private property and property owners must not only be shunned but they must to use by now somewhat famous hopper meme be physically removed if if need be by violence and forced to leave for other pastures not to do so inevitably leads to well communism socialism syndicalism or democracy and hence the very opposite of a social order that can call itself a libertarian now while these rightists or as I would say plain common sensical insights with these in mind I turn now to the more challenging question of how to move from here that is the status quo to there and for this it might be instructive to first briefly consider the answer given by the liberal la la peace and love and liberty frie de freude aya kuchen or capitalism is love libertarians because it reveals the same fundamental egalitarianism even if in a slightly different form as that exhibited also by the live and let live libertarians these these live and let live libertarians as I have just tried to show define what we may call the bad neighbor problem and what is in fact of course merely a shorthand for the general problem posed by the coexistence of distinctly different alien mutually disturbing annoying strange or hostile cultures they have simply defined this problem out of existence because they assume all people are exactly the same all cultures are the same and if that is true then a bad neighbor problem simply cannot exist now the same egalitarian or as a liberal libertarians themselves to prefer call themselves humanitarian spirit also comes to bear in their answer to the question of a libertarian strategy in a nutshell what they advise is this be nice talk to everyone and then in the long run the better libertarian arguments will win out to illustrate take my former friend turned into a foe Jeffrey Tucker who gives us five don'ts when talking liberty and I quote they are first don't be belligerent second don't presume hatred of liberty three don't presume different goals and four don't presume ignorance and five don't regard anyone as an enemy those are the four don'ts now quite apart from the fact that Tucker does not seem to follow his own advice in his belligerent condemnation of the entire old right as liberty hating fascists I find his exhortations truly astounding they may be good advice vis-a-vis people who have just sprung up from nowhere without any traceable history whatsoever but vis-a-vis real people with a recorded history they strike me as hopelessly naive unrealistic and outright counterproductive counterproductive in the pursuit of libertarian ends for I and I assume everyone else here know of and have had many people in my life who are ignorant who do have different unlibertarian goals and who do hate liberty as understood by libertarians and why in the world should I not regard such people as fools or enemies and why should I not hate and not be belligerent vis-a-vis my enemies as a libertarian strategy then I think texas advice must be considered simply a bad joke but surely it is good advice if one seeks entry into the state as some sort of libertarian state advisor and this may well explain the enthusiasm with which tachas humanitarian libertarianism has been embraced by the entire liberal libertarian crowd now outside libertarian outside egalitarian fantasy lands however in the real world libertarians must above all be realistic and recognize from the outset as the old right does the inequality not just of individuals but also of different cultures as an irreducible datum of the human existence we must further recognize that there exist plenty of enemies of liberty as defined by libertarianism and that they not we are in charge of worldly affairs that in many parts of the contemporary world their control of the populace is so complete that the idea of liberty on of a libertarian social order are practically unheard of or considered unthinkable except as some idle intellectual play or mental gymnastics by a few exotic individuals and that it is essentially only in the west that is in the countries of western and central europe and the lands settled by its people that the idea of liberty is so deeply rooted that these enemies still can be openly challenged in confining our strategic considerations now only to the west then we can identify pretty much as the old right has effectively done these actors and agencies as our principal enemies they are first and foremost the ruling elites in control of the state apparatus and in particular the so-called a deep state or the so-called cathedral of the military the secret services the central banks and the supreme courts as well they include the leaders of the military industrial complex that is of nominally private firms that owe their very existence to the state as the exclusive or dominant buyer of their products and they also include the leaders of the big commercial banks which owe their privilege of creating money and credit out of sin air to the existence of the central bank and its role as a lender of last resort they together that is state big business and big banking form an extremely powerful even if tiny mutual admiration society jointly ripping off the huge mass of taxpayers and living it up big time at their expense the second much larger group of enemies is made up of the intellectuals the educators and edu creds from the highest level of academia down to the level of elementary schools and kindergartens funded almost exclusively whether directly or indirectly by the state they in their overwhelming majority have become the soft tools and willing executioners in the hands of the ruling elite and its designs for absolute power and total control and certainly there are the journalists of the mainstream media as a docile products of the system of public education and the craven recipients and popularizers of government information now equally important in the development of a libertarian strategy then is immediately following next question who are the victims now the standard libertarian answer to this is the taxpayers as opposed to the tax consumers yet while this is essentially correct it is at best only part of the answer and libertarians could learn something in this respect from the alt right because apart from the narrowly economic aspect there is also a wider cultural aspect that must be taken into account in identifying the victims in order to expand and increase its power the ruling elites have been conducting for many decades what Pat Buchanan has identified as a systematic cultural war aimed at the trans valuation of all values and the destruction of all natural or if you will organic social bonds and institutions such as families communities ethnic groups and genealogically related nations so as to create inherently an increasingly atomized populace whose only shared characteristic and unifying bond is its common as existential dependency on the state the first step in this direction taken already more than half a century ago or even longer ago was the introduction of public welfare and social security thereby the underclass and the elderly were turned into state dependence and the value and the importance of family and community was correspondingly diminished and weakened more recently further reaching steps in this direction have proliferated and new victimology has been proclaimed and promoted women and in particular single mothers blacks browns latinos homosexuals lesbians bi and transsexuals have been awarded victim status and accorded legal privileges through non-discrimination or affirmative action decrease as well most recently such privileges have been expanded also to foreign national immigrants whether legal or illegal in so far as a four into one of the just mentioned categories or our members of non-christian religions such as Islam for instance the result not only has the earlier mentioned bad neighbor problem not been avoided or solved but it has been systematically promoted and intensified instead cultural homogeneity has been destroyed and the freedom of association and the voluntary physical segregation and separation of different people communities cultures and traditions has been replaced by an all pervasive system of forced social integration moreover each mentioned victim group has thus been pitted against every other and all of them have been pitted been pitted against white heterosexual christian males and in particular those married and with children as it only remaining legally unprotected group of alleged victimizers hence as a result of the transvaluation of all values promoted by the ruling elites the world has been literally turned upside down the institution of a family household with father mother and their children that has formed the basis of western civilizations as the freest most industrious ingenious and all around accomplished civilization known to mankind that is the very institution and people that has done most good in human history they have all done many bad things that group has been officially stigmatized and vilified as a source of all social ills and made the most heavily disadvantaged even persecuted group by the enemy elites relentless policy of dvd and imperial now accordingly given the present constellation of affairs and any promising libertarian strategy must very much as the old rise has recognized first and foremost be tailored and addressed to this group of the most severely victimized people white married christian couples with children in particular if they belong also to the class of taxpayers rather than tax consumers and everyone most closely resembling or aspiring to this standard form of social order and organization can be a realistically expected to be the most receptive audience for the libertarian message whereas the least support should be expected to come from the most highly protected groups such as for instance single black muslim mothers on welfare now given this constellation of perpetrators or enemies versus victims in the contemporary west then i can now come to the final task of trying to outline a realistic libertarian strategy for social change the specifics of which i'll come to that in a second should be prefaced by two general considerations for one given that the class of intellectuals from the tops of academia down to the opinion opinion molding journalists in the mainstream media so forth are funded by and firmly tied into the ruling system that is that they are part of the problem they also should not be expected to play a major if any role in the problem's solution accordingly the so-called hayekian strategy for social change that envisions the spread of correct libertarian ideas starting at the top with the leading philosophers and then trickling down from there to journalists and finally to the great unwashed masses must be considered fundamentally unrealistic instead any realistic libertarian strategy for change must be a populist strategy that is libertarians must short-circuit the dominant intellectual elites and address the masses directly to arouse their indignation and contempt for the ruling elites and secondly all the why all the while the main addresses of a populist libertarian message must be indeed the just mentioned group of dispossessed and disenfranchised native whites i believe it to be a serious strategic error to make whiteness the exclusive criterion on which to base one strategic decision as some strands of the old right have suggested to do wrongly so i believe after all it is above all white men that make up the ruling elite and that have foisted the current mess upon us true enough the various protected minorities mentioned before take full advantage of the legal privileges that they have been accorded and they have become increasingly emboldened to ask forevermore protection but none of them and all of them together did not and do not possess the intellectual prowess that would have made this outcome possible if it were not for the instrumental help that they received and are receiving from white men now taking our cues from the Buchanan the Ron Paul and the Trump movement on to the specifics of a populist strategy for libertarian change in no particular order except for the very first one which has currently assumed the greatest urgency in the public mind one stop mass immigration the waves of immigrants currently flooding flooding the western world have burdened it with hordes of welfare parasites brought in terrorists increased crime led to the proliferation of no-go areas and resulted in countless bad neighbors who based on their alien upbringing culture and tradition lack any understanding appreciation of liberty and are bound to become mindless future supporters of welfare statism no one is against immigration and immigrants per se but immigration must be by invitation only all immigrants must be productive people and hence be barred from all domestic welfare payments to ensure this they or their inviting party must place a bond with a community in which they are to settle and which is to be forfeited and lead to the immigrants deportation should he ever become a public burden as well every immigrant inviting party or employer should not only pay for the immigrants upkeep or salary but must also pay the residential community for the additional wear and tear of its public facilities that is associated with the immigrants presence so as to void the socialization of any and all costs incurred with his settlement moreover even before the admission every potential immigrant invitee must be carefully screened and tested not only for his productivity but also for cultural affinity or good labor needness with the empirically predictable result of mostly but no means but by no means exclusively western white immigrant candidates and any known communist or socialist of any color denomination or country of origin must be barred from permanent settlement unless that is the community where he the potential immigrant wants to settle officially sanctions the looting of its residents property by new foreign arrivals which is not very likely to say the least even with already existing commie communities now a brief message to all open border and liberal libertarians who will surely label this you guessed it as fascist now in a fully privatized libertarian social order there exists no such thing as a right to free immigration private property implies borders and the owner's right to exclude at will and public property has borders as well it is not unknown property it is a property of domestic taxpayers and most definitely not the property of foreigners and while it is true that the state is a criminal organization and that to entrust it with a task of border control will inevitably result in numerous injustices to both domestic residents and foreigners it is also true that the state does something when it decides not to do anything about border control and that under the present circumstances if the state would not do anything about border control that this will lead to even more and much graver injustices in particular to the domestic citizenry than any other policy to stop attacking killing and bombing people in foreign countries a main cause even if by no means the only one of the current invasion of western countries by hordes of alien immigrants are the wars initiated and conducted in the Middle East and elsewhere by the United States ruling elites and their subordinate western puppet elites as well the by now seemingly normal and ubiquitous terrorist attacks in the name of Islam across the western world are in large measure a blowback of these wars and the ensuing chaos throughout the Middle East and northern Africa there should be no hesitation on our part to call these western rulers responsible forces for what they really are murderers or accessories to mass murder we must demand and cry out loud instead for a foreign policy of strict non interventionism withdrawal from all international and supranational organizations such as the united nations nato and the united and the european union that intricate one country into the domestic affairs of another stop all government to government aid and prohibit all weapons sales to foreign states let it be america first england first germany first italy first turkey first and smaller bavaria first and veneto first and so forth each country trading with one another and no one interfering in anyone anyone else's domestic affairs three defund the ruling elites and its intellectual bodyguards expose and widely publicize the lavish salaries perks pensions side deals bribes and hush monies received by the ruling elites by the higher ups in government and governmental bureaucracies of supreme courts central banks secret services and spy agencies by politicians parliamentarians party leaders political advisors and consultants by crony capitalist public educates university presidents provost and academic stars derive home the point that all of their shining glory and luxury is funded by money extorted from taxpayers and consequently urge that any and all taxes be slashed income taxes property taxes sales taxes inheritance taxes and on and on for end the fed and all central banks the second source of funding for the ruling elites besides the money extorted from the public in the form of taxes comes from the central banks central banks are allowed to create paper money out of thin air this reduces the purchasing power of money and destroys the savings of average people it does not and cannot make society as a whole richer but it redistributes income and wealth within society the earliest receiver of the newly created money that is usually the ruling elites are thereby made richer and the later and latest receiver that is the average citizen are made poorer the central banks manipulation of interest rates is the cause of boom bus cycles the central bank permits the accumulation of ever greater public debt that is shifted as a burden onto unknown future taxpayers or is simply inflated away and as a facilitator of public debt the central banks are also the facilitators of wars this monstrosity must end and be replaced by a system of free competitive banking built on the foundation of a genuine commodity money such as gold and silver five abolish all affirmative action and non-discrimination laws and regulations all such edicts are blatant violations of the principle of the equality before the law that at least in the west is intuitively sensed and recognized and as a fundamental principle of justice as private property owners people must be free to associate or disassociate with others to include or to exclude to integrate or to segregate to join or to separate to unify and incorporate or to disunite exit and secede close all university departments for black latino women gender queer studies and so forth as incompatible with science and dismiss its faculties as intellectual imposters or scoundrels as well demand that all affirmative action commissars diversity and human resource officers from universities on down to schools and kindergartens be thrown out onto the street and be forced to learn some useful trade six crush the anti fascist mob the transvaluation of all values throughout the west the invention of evermore victim groups the spread of affirmative action programs and the relentless promotion of political correctness has led to the rise of an anti fascist mob tacitly supported and indirectly funded by the ruling elites this self-described mob of social justice warriors has taken upon itself the task of escalating the fight against white privilege through deliberate acts of terror directed against anyone and anything deemed racist right-wing fascist reactionary incorrigible or unreconstructed such enemies of progress are physically assaulted by the anti-antifascist mob their cars are burned down their properties are vandalized and their employers are threatened to dismiss them and ruin their careers all the while the police are ordered by the powers that be to stand down and not to investigate the crimes committed or persecute and punish the criminals in view of this outrage public anger must be aroused and there must be clamoring far and white for the police to be unleashed and this mob beaten into submission now a query again for liberal libertarians and the stupid for liberty who are sure to object to this demand on the ground that the police has to crush the anti fascist mob our state police question to them do you also object on the same grounds that the police arrest murderers or rapists aren't these legitimate tasks performed also in a libertarian order by private police and if the police are not allowed to do anything about this mob isn't it okay then that the target of these attacks namely the so-called racist right should take the task upon itself and of giving the social justice warriors a bloody nose seven crush the street criminals and gangs in dispensing with the principle of the equality before the law and awarding all sorts of group privileges except to the one group that I mentioned the ruling elites have also dispensed with a principle of equal punishment for equal crime some state favored groups are handed more lenient punishment for the same crime than others and some especially favored groups are simply let run wild and go practically unpunished at all thus actually and effectively promoting crime as well no go areas have been permitted to develop where any effort at law enforcement has essentially ceased to exist and where violent thugs and street gangs have taken over in view of this public fewer must be provoked and it be unmistakably demanded that the police crack down quick and hard on any robber mugger rapist and murderer and ruthlessly clear all current no go areas of violent gang rule needless to say that this policy should be colorblind but if it happens to be as it in fact is that most street criminals or gang members are young black or Latino males or in Europe young immigrant males from Africa the Middle East the Balkans or Eastern Europe then so be it and such human specimen then should be the ones that most prominently get their noses bloodied and needless to say also that in order to defend against crime whether ordinary street crime or acts of terrorism or prohibitions against the ownership of guns by upstanding citizens should be abolished eight get rid of all welfare parasites and bombs to cement their own position the ruling class has put the underclass on the dole and thus made it the most reliable source of public support allegedly to help people rise and move up from the underclass to become self-supporting actors the real and actually intended effect of the state's so-called social policy is the exact opposite it has rendered a person's underclass status more permanent and made the underclass permanently grow and with this of course also the number of tax-funded social workers and therapists assigned to help and assist this group for in accordance with in not exact with exact economic law every subsidy awarded on account of some alleged need or deficiency produces more not less of the problem that it is supposed to alleviate or eliminate thus the root cause of a person's underclass status that is his low impulse control and high time preference that is his uncontrolled desire for immediate gratification and the various attendant manifestations of this cause such as permanent unemployment poverty alcoholism drug abuse domestic violence divorce female-headed households out of wedlock births rotating checkup male companions child abuse negligence and petty crime is and are not alleviated or eliminated but systematically strengthened and promoted instead of continuing and expanding the increasingly unsightly social disaster it should be abolished and be loudly demanded that one takes heed of the biblical exhortation that he who can but will not work also shall not eat and that he who truly cannot work due to severe mental or physical deficiencies be taken care of by family community and voluntary charity nine get the state out of education most if not all social pathologies plaguing the contemporary west have their common root in the institution of public education when the first steps were taken well more than 200 years ago in pressure to supplement and ultimately replace a formally completely private system of education with a universal system of compulsory public education the time spent in state-run schools did in most cases not exceed four years today throughout the entire western world the time spent in institutions of public education is at a minimum around 10 years in many cases and increasingly so 20 or even 30 years that is a large or even the largest part of time during the most formative period in a person's life is spent in state funded and state supervised institutions whose primary purpose from the very beginning it was not to raise an enlightened public but to train good soldiers and later on good public servants not independent and mature myndige burger but subordinate and servile starts burger the result the indoctrination has worked the longer the time a person has spent was in the system of public education the more he is committed to leftist egalitarian ideas and has swallowed and wholeheartedly internalized the official doctrine and agenda of political correctness indeed in particular among social science teachers and professors people not counting themselves as part of the left have practically ceased to exist consequently it must be demanded that the control of schools and universities be rest away from the central government and in the first step be returned to regional or better still local and locally funded authorities and ultimately be completely privatized so so as to replace a system of compulsory uniformity and conformity with a system of decentralized education that reflects the natural variation multiplicity and diversity of human talents and interest and ten and last don't put your trust in politics and political parties just as academia and the academic world cannot be expected to play any significant role in the libertarian strategy for social change so with politics and political parties after all it is the ultimate goal of libertarianism to put an end to our politics to subject all interpersonal relations and conflicts to private law and civil law procedures to be sure under present or pervasively politicized conditions and involvement in politics and party politics cannot be entirely avoided however any such involvement in any such involvement one must be keenly aware of and guard against the corrupting influence of power and the lure of money and perks that comes with it and to minimize the risk and temptation that comes from this it is advisable to concentrate one's effort on the level of regional and local rather than national politics and they are to promote a radical agenda of decentralization of nullification and peaceful separation segregation and the session most importantly however we must take heed of Ludwig von Mises's life motto do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it that is we must speak out whenever and wherever whether informal or informal in gatherings against anyone affronting us with the by now only all too familiar political correct drivel and left egalitarian balda dash and unmistakably say no hell no you must be kidding and in the meantime given the almost complete mind control exercised by the ruling elites academia and the mainstream media it already acquires a good portion of courage to do that but if we are not brave enough to do so now and thus set an example for others to follow matters will become increasingly worse and more dangerous in the future and we and western civilization and the western ideas of freedom and liberty will be wiped out and vanish thank you very much


Gildan Media, a division of recorded books, presents The Future of Design, Global Product Innovation for a Complex World, by Lorraine Justice, narrated by Catherine Fenton. Publishers note, this audiobook has bonus material. Please contact whomever you purchase this audiobook from to request the material. All figures and tables referenced in this audiobook can be found in the bonus material. Introduction The Future of Design Design, at its best, feels good. It brings people into the moment through their senses and gives them a great experience. Whether you're designing a functional object, a temporary shelter for victims of natural disasters, a theme park, or interactive technology, well-designed products and services should make people's experiences and lives better, if not enjoyable in some way. Good design can alleviate problematic experiences, too. People want to feel safe in a hospital, hotel room, or walking down a street at night. Improving the impact of spaces, the delicit feelings of discomfort, confusion, or fear helps designers create an environment that is comfortable and reassuring. This also applies to convenience. Improving airline check-in counters, online banking, or hospital protocol can be a goal of designers when implementing the design process, an important part of which is to work directly with consumers and users on improving the experience. Good design is efficient. It can turn cumbersome and complicated processes into clear instruction. Complex problems can be visualized through steps to help bring about solutions and opportunities. Countries such as Australia, Finland, and Sweden have included their citizens in the design process to create easier tax forms and simplify other governmental functions. These are examples of design thinking in action. Design thinking is an overarching term that includes the design process and can spur large and small innovations. It encompasses two fundamental ways of thinking, divergent and convergent thinking. Convergent thinking enables you to broaden your thinking in the pursuit of ideas. Convergent thinking enables you to narrow your thoughts to eliminate solutions and ideas that do not fit the problem. Trying to find a solution to a design problem or opportunity can be mentally taxing and intense, but it can also be exhilarating and satisfying when ideas come together. Students and their teams need to maintain a positive yet critical mindset when considering new ideas. They synthesize large amounts of information from various sources in relation to the problem or opportunity. They actively work to connect the information to create insights that might form solutions. Using information to drive insights is a form of design reasoning, a key concept within the design thinking process. Design and innovation rarely follow a linear path, so it may take several iterations of the design process to come up with something unique that addresses the original challenge. Design reasoning helps designers move between divergent thinking and convergent thinking. It is often a fast process, but it is iterative and reactive, which helps to move the designer and the team toward a solution. Design reasoning occurs when disparate pieces of information are compared for usefulness. Those disparate pieces of information are accepted or rejected. Diverse ideas are held for equal consideration. Design reasoning is a mental give and take that allows you to move through many solutions in order to find the best ones. Through the design reasoning process, ideas may be evaluated and rejected, rearranged, changed, stripped of attributes, and held as contradictory solutions to the same problem if there are many ways to approach it. Design reasoning may use visualization or sketching techniques to help determine the best shapes or attributes for the solution. Design drawings or quick sketches are used to capture and record these ideas so they can be evaluated. Sample complete. Ready to continue?


Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States and Mrs. Reagan. Ladies and gentlemen, the national anthems of the Federative Republic of Brazil and the United States of America. Delighted today to welcome President Figueiredo and Mrs. Figueiredo to Washington. Over our many years of friendship with Brazil, Mr. President, your country has often been described as the nation of the future. Well, the future is here. Brazil has increasingly looked to not for its potential, but for its capabilities, not for what it will accomplish, but for what it is accomplishing. Mr. President, Mr. President, and Mrs. Figueiredo in Washington. Over our many years of friendship with Brazil, Mr. President, your country has frequently been described as the nation of the future. Well, the future is here. Brazil is increasingly looked to not for its potential and always for its capabilities, not for what it will accomplish, but for what it is accomplishing. We in the United States rejoice with the people of Brazil for the progress that you have made economically, politically, and socially, and look forward to expanding on the mature relationship we've developed. The ties that bind us are firm with mutual respect and trust reinforced by time and shared values. Our friendship, Mr. President, goes back to the early days of Brazilian independence when the United States was the first country to recognize your sovereignty. Brazil was the first South American nation to have an ambassador in Washington. In the United States, we rejoice with the people of Brazil for the progress that has been achieved in the economic, political, and social spheres. Brazil is the first country in which we have been related to partnership with everybody, even among the nation we know, and we are holding on to brotherhood. We are one country that is not alone, the United States is united by unity. Glory to the United States! We are united by unity. We are united by unity. The American people will not forget, President Figueredo, that in both the first and second world wars, Brazil joined with us to confront the threat to freedom. Since the war years, our two countries have collaborated on many fronts to meet diverse challenges to the security and well-being of our peoples. Brazil is an independent force for moderation and balance in this hemisphere. And while our two countries have had disagreements which is only natural and to be expected among friends, we have never lost that mutual respect and admiration so characteristic of our relationship. We will not forget, President Figueredo, that in both the first and second world war, Brazil joined with us to face the threat to freedom. Since the war years, our two countries have collaborated on many fronts to face diverse challenges, security and well-being of our peoples. Brazil is an independent force for moderation and balance in this hemisphere. And although there have been disagreements between our countries, which are natural and to be expected among friends, we have never lost that mutual respect and admiration so characteristic of our relationship. Your leadership, Mr. President, has built upon the qualities of which I've just spoken. During a state visit to Colombia last year, you explained, in extreme situations, political wisdom requires utmost levels of tolerance. We learn that tolerance and moderation don't bring bitter fruits and are uncontestable demonstrations of fidelity to the true ideal of democracy. I'm afraid that the future of the country will be a lot of more difficult times for us, and that's why we have to face the challenges of this situation. The future is a long-term, but still a long-term, long-term, long-lasting, long-term, long-lasting struggle. We have to face the challenges of this situation. Mr. President, the motto of Brazil is order and progress, and during these trying times, your country has proven that it takes these words seriously, especially hard hit by rising energy prices, your government made an impressive commitment to do what was necessary to protect your people's standard of living and the Brazilian way of life. As a result of this commitment, your country is now a leader in the development of alternative energy resources, especially the use of alcohol as a fuel in the harnessing of hydroelectric energy. Mr. President, the motto of Brazil is order and progress, and during these trying times, your country has proven that it takes these words seriously, severely hit by rising energy prices, your government made an impressive commitment to do what was necessary to protect the standard of living of your people and the way of living the Brazilian way. Mr. President, the motto of Brazil is order and progress, and during these trying times, your government made an impressive commitment to do what was necessary to protect your people and the way of living the Brazilian way. At Brazil overcomes such obstacles is no surprise to us. We share a similar pioneer heritage. Our two peoples are also similar in that they represent a melting pot of cultures and ethnic backgrounds. But the most significant comparison remains the respect for individual enterprise and diversity that has developed in our two countries. In Brazil, these obstacles are no surprise to us. We have in common a pioneer heritage. Our two countries are also similar in the sense that they represent a chain of cultures and ethnic backgrounds. But the most important parallel remains the respect for individual enterprise and diversity that has developed in our two countries. The Amazon River is to many synonymous with Brazil. Its grandeur, enormity and power stagger the imagination. But so too does Brazil. Let us pledge that we shall always remember and never take for granted the good will between us. President Figueiredo, it has been 11 years since a Brazilian president honored the United States with a state visit. This is too long a period for nations which have so much to contribute to one another. Let us confirm that the personal bonds we develop through this visit will re-enforce the future of Brazil. President Figueiredo, it has been 11 years since a Brazilian president honored the United States with a state visit. This is too long a period for nations which have so much to contribute to one another. Let us confirm that the personal bonds we develop through this visit will strengthen the friendship between our peoples. He reported to me the constructive and amicable approach with which he was met. So today, I look forward to our discussion. I have much to learn from you and seek your counsel on matters of mutual concern. In your annual message to the Brazilian Congress last year you said of Brazil, we seek to understand and to be understood. Well, let this be the basis of our talks today. Two old friends in a period of change, honestly and with sincerity, seeking good will and understanding. We seek to understand and to be understood and to be understood. And let this be the basis of our talks today. Thank you very much. of two old friends who live in a time of transformations in search of honesty and honesty of good will and understanding. And with that said, President Figueiredo, I welcome you to the United States. President Figueiredo, I welcome you to the United States. Mr. President, I am very grateful for the words of salvation that have just been pronounced. Brazil and the United States have been able to conduct their relations in a balanced way, constituting in 150 years a patrimony of appreciation, understanding and respect for reciprocals. Mr. President, thank you for your words of welcome. For over 150 years Brazil and the United States have maintained balanced relations. Ours is a heritage of mutual esteem, understanding and respect. My visit to this country is therefore only a natural development of our bilateral relations. Our relations with the United States play an important role in the framework of our foreign policy. Brazil's progress is predicated upon the diversification and enhancement of its international presence. It is a Brazilian goal to better adapt our bilateral relations to the world of today. To this end, the exchange of information and ideas between our governments should be intensified. I consider it particularly positive that at a time as troubled as we live, we have this opportunity of frank dialogue. The most difficult realities demonstrate all the time that dialogue is a diplomatic instrument of unthinkable value. Under the present difficult circumstances, I regard the opportunity of having an open discussion with you, Mr. President, as particularly positive. The harshest of realities demonstrate repeatedly that dialogue is an invaluable diplomatic tool. I arrive in Washington willing to examine together with you the problems that concern us both in the political and economic fields. I am willing to listen and to speak frankly and objectively. We wish in Brazil to explore in a creative and lasting way the wide range of convergence in the field of interests and values that exist between us and the great country of your excellence. We in Brazil wish to take a lasting and creative approach to the commonality of interests and values existing between us and your great country. The breadth and range of our relations encourages to anticipate favorable results, as our countries have their own unique characteristics and play distinct roles in international and regional politics. The breadth and range of our relations encourages to anticipate favorable results, as our countries have their own unique characteristics and play distinct roles in international as well as regional politics. It is only natural that differences of opinion should exist. We will endeavor to smooth them out through the exchange of ideas, views and clarifications. From the diplomatic angle, we have set the universalist and diversified path to the areas of interest of our foreign policy. Brazil is a country of the West and of the Third World, a Latin American country marked by the African heritage that it received, among others. The Brazilian foreign policy wants to translate to the international plan this inestimable wealth of our historical experience. Mr. President, it is a known fact that in Brazil we are going through a specially significant chapter of our political history during which democratic institutions are being consolidated. From a diplomatic standpoint, we adopt a universalistic approach. Our foreign policy is diversified. Brazil is both a Western and a Third World country. It is a Latin American country with a strong African heritage, among others. Brazilian foreign policy endeavors to reflect this wealth of historical experience. We believe that in a world where reasons of crisis are multiplied, diplomacy must continue to build bridges between states, even in times of despair and conflict. In a world where crisis multiplies, diplomacy must continue to build bridges between states, even in times of despair and conflict, agreement, however difficult, has to be found. In the international sphere, some impasses still remain, such as the issue of nuclear disarmament, of vital importance for the destiny of mankind. The North-South negotiations do not progress. Forging links of cooperation among peoples has never been so vital and so urgent. The ties of mutual confidence among the countries of this continent so that the spirit of conciliation and peace may prosper. Mr. President, in this spirit I want to start my dialogue with you excellently. Our governments are used to understanding. This is our tradition. This will be our future. What about Bob Michael? He doesn't like your budget. You can believe most of it. Well, go on back inside now. Let's go.