A.W.A.D asks, “Why procrastinate when you can perendinate?”




verb tr. : To put off until the day after tomorrow.

verb intr.: To stay at a college for an extended time.


From Latin perendinare (to defer until the day after tomorrow), from perendie (on the day after tomorrow), from dies (day).


The word procrastinate is from Latin cras (tomorrow). So when you procrastinate, literally speaking, you are putting something off till tomorrow. Mark Twain once said, “Never put off until tomorrow what you can do the day after tomorrow.” In other words, why procrastinate when you can perendinate?

Mark 12 with Legos

I continue to find wonderful (and much less stuffy than you might expect) Bible resources online, e.g.,

hip-hop messiah

Theme song to The Boondocks:

I am the stone that the builder refused,
I am the visual,
the inspiration,
that made lady sing the blues,

I’m the spark that makes your idea bright,
the same spark,
that lights the dark,
so that you can know your left from your, right,

I am the ballot in your box,
the bullet in the gun,
that inner glow,
that lets you know,
to call your brother “son”

The story that just begun,
the promise of what’s to come,
and imma remain a soldier,
til’ the war is won …

the stone that the builder refused

I love the first 12 lines of Mark 12. In it, we have (it seems to me) Jesus summarizing the Gospel of Mark itself:

  1. And he began to speak unto them by parables. A certain man planted a vineyard, and set an hedge about it, and digged a place for the winefat, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country.
  2. And at the season he sent to the husbandmen a servant, that he might receive from the husbandmen of the fruit of the vineyard.
  3. And they caught him, and beat him, and sent him away empty.
  4. And again he sent unto them another servant; and at him they cast stones, and wounded him in the head, and sent him away shamefully handled.
  5. And again he sent another; and him they killed, and many others; beating some, and killing some.
  6. Having yet therefore one son, his wellbeloved, he sent him also last unto them, saying, They will reverence my son.
  7. But those husbandmen said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours.
  8. And they took him, and killed him, and cast him out of the vineyard.
  9. What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others.
  10. And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:
  11. This was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
  12. And they sought to lay hold on him, but feared the people: for they knew that he had spoken the parable against them: and they left him, and went their way.

Robert Murphy to the Rescue

all power to the people!

The Mises Institute is digitizing half a century’s worth of The Freeman, thanks to the fact that FEE founder Leonard Read

eschewed the use of exclusive copyright. That is to say, he encouraged the widest possible distribution of his work and did not forbid others from copying his infinitely reproducible ideas. (Jeffrey Tucker, “The Works of Leonard E. Read”)

Through these collections, I’m discovering some great mid-century libertarian writing.

Here’s an example:

The rallying cry of this new Left [in the French revolutionary government] was, All power to the people! And, as always, it sounded good to the people. But the point that the French people missed is the same point that haunts the world today. It is this: the people cannot themselves individually exercise the power of government; the power must be held by one or a few persons. Those who hold the power always claim that they use it for the people, whether the form of government is a kingdom, a dictatorship, a democracy, or whatever. If the people truly desire to retain or to regain their freedom, their attention should first be directed to the principle of limiting the power of government itself instead of merely demanding the right to vote on what party or person is to hold the power. For is the victim of government power any the less deprived of his life, liberty, or property merely because the depriving is done in the name of — or even with the consent of — the majority of the people?

That’s from Dean Russel’s “The First Leftist,” first published in 1951.Download PDF

how it feels

Walter Block is my kind of lunatic

“Most people who read this book will dismiss it as the ravings of a lunatic. For I advocate the complete, total, and full privatization of all roads, streets, highways, byways, avenues, and other vehicular thoroughfares. And I am serious about this, deadly serious.”

Walter Block,
The Privatization of Roads and Highways

End State Maintenance

that ol' time anarchy

Robert A. WicksWrites Robert A. Wicks:

I grew up in a black, rural community in Mississippi. …

Those neighborhoods, with their localized anarchy, were nonetheless orderly places. The communities policed themselves through ostracism and familial ties. There was little disorder within anarchy. …

And what do we frequently see in those areas now? Chaos. Disorder. Mayhem. Government. …

What afflicts many American black neighborhoods and communities today is not the absence of rules so much as the natural effects of rules forced upon the unwilling. …

Far from bringing chaos, the anarchic portions of our lives are usually the most peaceful and orderly parts of them.


As H.L. Mencken put it,

The more reflective reader reads next to nothing in the way of newspapers and believes the same amount precisely. Why should he read or believe more? Every time he alights on anything that impinges upon his own field of knowledge he discovers at once that it is inaccurate and puerile. The essential difficulty here is that journalism, to be intellectually respectable, requires a kind of equipment in its practitioner that is necessarily rare in the world, and especially rare in a country given over to the superficial. He should have the widest conceivable range of knowledge, and he should be the sort of man who is not easily deluded by the specious and the fraudulent. Obviously, there are not enough such men to go round. The best newspaper, if it is lucky, may be able to muster half a dozen at a given moment, but the average newspaper seldom has even one. Thus American journalism (like the journalism of any other country) is predominantly paltry and worthless. Its pretensions are enormous, but its achievements are insignificant. (Minority Report: H. L. Mencken’s Notebooks, p. 74)

Or as my father put it,

To be a lawyer you have to fail a morality test; to write for the media you have to fail English and logic.

Postscript: I had an old college friend who, after several years in a top Ivy League graduate school, showed up at my local university as a new tenure-track professor. We had lunch and played catchup. She told me, without any apparent irony, that she agreed with almost everything she read in the New York Times.