Wine Fraud

Wine fraud relates to the commercial aspects of wine .
The most prevalent type of fraud is one where wines are adulterated , usually with the addition of cheaper products ( e.g .
juices ) and sometimes with harmful chemicals and sweeteners ( compensating for colour or flavour ) .
Counterfeiting and the relabeling of inferior and cheaper wines to more expensive brands is another common type of wine fraud .
The Natural Law : A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy , by Heinrich A. Rommen To understand the meaning of the title and introductory paragraph , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ gloomy fellow traveler of Epicurus , ” picturing the state of nature as chaos – a war of all against all .
Hobbes , following Occam , held that reason is unable to know universals ; words describing universals are mere words , assigned arbitrarily , without any grounding in fact .
Man , in a state of nature , is no more than a wolf – wicked , devoted solely to himself , no natural tendency to live in society .
This brutish individualism would cause in Hobbes an antagonism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the like .
Such voluntary organizations could not constrain man ’ s brutish behavior .
For this reason , Hobbes sees that man is willing to give up many rights in order to achieve the greater good of peace .
( How such a brute would decide such a thing , how he might even come to know that peace is a “ good , ” is not clear . )
These rights are given up to an absolute sovereign .
Hobbes would argue that agreement among irrational creatures is natural , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only .
As it is artificial , a third party must be brought in to make the agreement constant and lasting .
Everyone would then submit his will to the judgement of this one Man , this one Will .
Once everyone does so , this one man can use terror to inform the wills of all .
Hobbes natural law is nothing more than a law of subjugation – the older idea of natural law as a moral basis for positive law , as an objective for which law would strive , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cogito , ergo sum – I think , therefore I am .
Man , from the ideas present in his own reasoning , can construct the world according to the lines of mathematical reasoning – the ideal of science .
Individual reason was the measure of itself .
The objective basis of natural law has disappeared .
For Locke , natural law was meant to establish as inalienable the rights of the individual .
These rights do not flow from objective orders of norm ; instead , these rights bring about whatever order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agreement , still , with no objective standard by which to measure such terms .
Civil society is , therefore , not a result of man ’ s social nature ; it is the result of individual self-interest .
Nothing transcendent or overarching – a skepticism of metaphysics , if you will .
Instead of an objective metaphysical reality , natural law would be based on – for Locke – Locke ’ s worldview of proper law .
Of course , this opened the doors for others to hold to a different worldview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rousseau saw the state of nature as something approaching the biblical Paradise .
Men happily and freely become citizens , a war of all against all does not compel them into some sort of social contract .
They enter because it is their will – and as everyone has the same will , the General Will is born .
Of course , this didn ’ t end so well for those who , it turns out , had a different General Will .
Rousseau ’ s passion for liberty and virtue would produce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Reign of Terror .
Rommen would identify three primary differences when considering the original idea of natural law of the Scholastics to the work of thinkers such as these noted here .
First is the individualistic idea that the state of nature is the proper starting point for the discovery of natural law ; second , the nominalist attitude of separating eternal law and natural moral law ; third , the resultant autonomy of human reason .
I might summarize : each man is an island : nothing above him , nothing below @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after him .
The further development of this fraudulent wine will be examined in a subsequent post .
The Best of Bionic Mosquito

Wine fraud relates to the commercial aspects of wine. The most prevalent type of fraud is one where wines are adulterated, usually with the addition of cheaper products (e.g. juices) and sometimes with harmful chemicals and sweeteners (compensating for colour or flavour). Counterfeiting and the relabeling of inferior and cheaper wines to more expensive brands is another common type of wine fraud.
The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy, by Heinrich A. Rommen
To understand the meaning of the title and introductory paragraph, see here.
Thomas Hobbes
The entire theory of Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1679) amounts at bottom to a denial of the natural law.
Rommen describes him as a “gloomy fellow traveler of Epicurus,” picturing the state of nature as chaos – a war of all against all. Hobbes, following Occam, held that reason is unable to know universals; words describing universals are mere words, assigned arbitrarily, without any grounding in fact. The Natural Law: A Stu... Heinrich A. Rommen Best Price: $7.00 Buy New $8.00 (as of 01:18 UTC - Details)
Man, in a state of nature, is no more than a wolf – wicked, devoted solely to himself, no natural tendency to live in society. This brutish individualism would cause in Hobbes an antagonism toward cooperative organizations such as guilds and the like. Such voluntary organizations could not constrain man’s brutish behavior.
For this reason, Hobbes sees that man is willing to give up many rights in order to achieve the greater good of peace. (How such a brute would decide such a thing, how he might even come to know that peace is a “good,” is not clear.) These rights are given up to an absolute sovereign.
Hobbes would argue that agreement among irrational creatures is natural, but among men is artificial – by covenant only. As it is artificial, a third party must be brought in to make the agreement constant and lasting.
“The only way to erect such a Common Power…is, to conferre all their power and strength upon one Man, or upon one Assembly of Men, that may reduce all their Wills, by plurality of voices, unto one Will….”
Everyone would then submit his will to the judgement of this one Man, this one Will. Once everyone does so, this one man can use terror to inform the wills of all. Hobbes natural law is nothing more than a law of subjugation – the older idea of natural law as a moral basis for positive law, as an objective for which law would strive, would lose all of its function.
René Descartes
Cogito, ergo sum – I think, therefore I am. Man, from the ideas present in his own reasoning, can construct the world according to the lines of mathematical reasoning – the ideal of science. Individual reason was the measure of itself.
Suarez’ prediction of what would happen should human reason be made the source of the natural law now came true. Rationalism soon made human reason and its innate ideas the measure of what it is. Human reason could now indulge in the uncontrolled construction of systems that has ever characterized the natural law of rationalism.
The objective basis of natural law has disappeared.
John Locke
For Locke, natural law was meant to establish as inalienable the rights of the individual. These rights do not flow from objective orders of norm; instead, these rights bring about whatever order exists. Order is induced by voluntary agreement, still, with no objective standard by which to measure such terms.
Civil society is, therefore, not a result of man’s social nature; it is the result of individual self-interest. Nothing transcendent or overarching – a skepticism of metaphysics, if you will. Instead of an objective metaphysical reality, natural law would be based on – for Locke – Locke’s worldview of proper law. Of course, this opened the doors for others to hold to a different worldview.
Jean Jacques Rousseau
Virtually the opposite of Hobbes, Rousseau saw the state of nature as something approaching the biblical Paradise. Men happily and freely become citizens, a war of all against all does not compel them into some sort of social contract. They enter because it is their will – and as everyone has the same will, the General Will is born.
Of course, this didn’t end so well for those who, it turns out, had a different General Will. Rousseau’s passion for liberty and virtue would produce fruit in men like Robespierre and the Reign of Terror.
The Primary Differences
Rommen would identify three primary differences when considering the original idea of natural law of the Scholastics to the work of thinkers such as these noted here. First is the individualistic idea that the state of nature is the proper starting point for the discovery of natural law; second, the nominalist attitude of separating eternal law and natural moral law; third, the resultant autonomy of human reason.
I might summarize: each man is an island: nothing above him, nothing below him, nothing before him, nothing after him.
Conclusion
During the Middle Ages, [if] a producer or merchant was found selling fraudulent or “corrupt wine”, they were forced to drink all of it. In medieval Germany, the penalty for selling fraudulent wine ranged from branding to beating to death by hanging.
The further development of this fraudulent wine will be examined in a subsequent post.
Reprinted with permission from Bionic Mosquito.
The Best of Bionic Mosquito


lewrockwell--2020-02-22--The Death Of Free Speech: Zuckerberg Asks Governments For Instructions On ‘What Discourse Should Be

The Death Of Free Speech: Zuckerberg Asks Governments For Instructions On ‘What Discourse Should Be Allowed’

I have written for years on the effort of European countries to expand their crackdown on free speech globally through restrictions on social media and Internet speech .
It appears that Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg has relented in what may prove the death knell for free speech in the West .
Zuckerberg seems to relent in asking governments for regulations stipulating what speech will be permitted on Facebook and other platforms .
It is the ultimate victory of France , Germany , and England in their continuing attack on free expression though hate speech laws and speech regulation .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saturday at the Munich Security Conference that “ There should be more guidance and regulation from the states on basically — take political advertising as an example — what discourse should be allowed ?
” He did add : “ Or , on the balance of free expression and some things that people call harmful expression , where do you draw the line ?
” The problem is that his comments were received as accepting that government will now dictate the range of free speech .
What is missing is the bright line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 10.00 As tragically demonstrated in France , Germany , and the United Kingdom , speech regulations inevitably expand with time .
The desire to silence one ’ s critics becomes insatiable for both governments and individuals .
Zuckerberg is facing great pressure , including from Democratic leaders in the United States , to regulate political speech and he seems to be moving away from the bright-line position against such regulation as a principle .
Instead , he is accepting the fluid concept of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ preceded expanding speech codes and criminalization : “ There are a lot of decisions in these areas that are really just balances between different social values .
It ’ s about coming up with an answer that society feels is legitimate and that they can get behind and understand that you drew the line here on the balance of free expression and safety .
It ’ s not just that there ’ s one right answer .
People need to feel like , ‘ OK , enough people weighed in , and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this , and we can get behind that .
’ ”

I have written for years on the effort of European countries to expand their crackdown on free speech globally through restrictions on social media and Internet speech. It appears that Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg has relented in what may prove the death knell for free speech in the West. Zuckerberg seems to relent in asking governments for regulations stipulating what speech will be permitted on Facebook and other platforms. It is the ultimate victory of France, Germany, and England in their continuing attack on free expression though hate speech laws and speech regulation.
Zuckerberg told an assembly of Western leaders Saturday at the Munich Security Conference that “There should be more guidance and regulation from the states on basically — take political advertising as an example — what discourse should be allowed?” He did add: “Or, on the balance of free expression and some things that people call harmful expression, where do you draw the line?” The problem is that his comments were received as accepting that government will now dictate the range of free speech. What is missing is the bright line rule long maintained by the free speech community.
Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details) As tragically demonstrated in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, speech regulations inevitably expand with time. The desire to silence one’s critics becomes insatiable for both governments and individuals.
Zuckerberg is facing great pressure, including from Democratic leaders in the United States, to regulate political speech and he seems to be moving away from the bright-line position against such regulation as a principle. Instead, he is accepting the fluid concept of “balanced” regulations that has always preceded expanding speech codes and criminalization:
“There are a lot of decisions in these areas that are really just balances between different social values. It’s about coming up with an answer that society feels is legitimate and that they can get behind and understand that you drew the line here on the balance of free expression and safety. It’s not just that there’s one right answer. People need to feel like, ‘OK, enough people weighed in, and that’s why the answer should be this, and we can get behind that.’”
Originally published at Jonathan Turley.


lewrockwell--2020-02-22--Kremlin: Claims of Russian Backing for Trump in US Election ‘Untrue’ & Down to ‘Paranoia’

Vladimir Putin ’ s spokesman says statements suggesting Russia plans to interfere in this year ’ s US Presidential election “ don ’ t have anything in common with the truth.
” Dmitry Peskov slammed the idea that Moscow will attempt to help President Donald Trump achieve re-election as being of “ paranoid character.
” He was responding to US media reports which claimed US intelligence has warned politicians that Moscow is already laying the groundwork to get behind the Republican Party incumbent .
CNN , quoting its usual anonymous sources , told of a briefing where Russian readiness to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of social media , and attacks on election infrastructure was outlined .
The new scare has echoes of the hysteria around the 2016 campaign when Trump unexpectedly beat favorite Hillary Clinton .
That led to years of speculation , much of it often xenophobic , before special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s investigation found no evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia .
Against the Left : A Ro ... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 “ Unfortunately , there will be more and more [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Peskov told reporters in Moscow on Friday afternoon .
The New York Times , also relying on unnamed ‘ insiders , ’ kicked of the latest furore on Thursday evening when it reported how “ intelligence officials warned House lawmakers last week that Russia was interfering in the 2020 campaign to try to get President Trump re-elected… a disclosure to Congress that angered Mr. Trump , who complained that Democrats would use it against him.
” The latest news of so-called Russian meddling comes shortly after reports that Trump had offered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if he would publicly deny that Russia had anything to do with email leaks from the DNC which damaged Clinton in 2016 .
That bombshell news seemed to be a willful misinterpretation of a statement presented by Assange ’ s barrister Edward Fitzgerald regarding a visit to the Australian by US Congressman Dana Rohrabacher – where , according to earlier reports , he was offered “ definitive proof that Russia was not the source ” of the DNC emails .
Nonetheless , US media has once again spun into overdrive about alleged Russian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence , just in time for the next presidential election cycle .

Vladimir Putin’s spokesman says statements suggesting Russia plans to interfere in this year’s US Presidential election “don’t have anything in common with the truth.”
Dmitry Peskov slammed the idea that Moscow will attempt to help President Donald Trump achieve re-election as being of “paranoid character.”
He was responding to US media reports which claimed US intelligence has warned politicians that Moscow is already laying the groundwork to get behind the Republican Party incumbent.
CNN, quoting its usual anonymous sources, told of a briefing where Russian readiness to use hacking, the ‘weaponisation’ of social media, and attacks on election infrastructure was outlined.
The new scare has echoes of the hysteria around the 2016 campaign when Trump unexpectedly beat favorite Hillary Clinton. That led to years of speculation, much of it often xenophobic, before special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation found no evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia. Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details)
“Unfortunately, there will be more and more [paranoia] as we approach the elections,” Peskov told reporters in Moscow on Friday afternoon.
The New York Times, also relying on unnamed ‘insiders,’ kicked of the latest furore on Thursday evening when it reported how “intelligence officials warned House lawmakers last week that Russia was interfering in the 2020 campaign to try to get President Trump re-elected… a disclosure to Congress that angered Mr. Trump, who complained that Democrats would use it against him.”
The latest news of so-called Russian meddling comes shortly after reports that Trump had offered jailed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange a pardon if he would publicly deny that Russia had anything to do with email leaks from the DNC which damaged Clinton in 2016.
That bombshell news seemed to be a willful misinterpretation of a statement presented by Assange’s barrister Edward Fitzgerald regarding a visit to the Australian by US Congressman Dana Rohrabacher – where, according to earlier reports, he was offered “definitive proof that Russia was not the source” of the DNC emails.
Nonetheless, US media has once again spun into overdrive about alleged Russian interference, despite lacking any proof or evidence, just in time for the next presidential election cycle.
Reprinted from RT News.