Recent comments

  • Paul's picture
    Paul 1 year 6 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    Good job, Paul. With some luck, Virgil might think himself through this conundrum. 1) Complaining: I can see both points - either we should complain long and loud about surveillance (such as this article), or we can ignore it as Sam says. 2) Evading: I believe we should make life as difficult as possible for the snoops, within the bounds of our tolerance. Turn it into a form of entertainment. 3) Fatalism: We can never be sure we can beat the snoops at their game. 4) Arms: Being armed means we don't care that #3 is true.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 1 year 6 weeks ago Page Lawrence Samuels
    It's a waste of time, expecting consistency from human beings. Their entire education and daily continuing indoctrination amounts to training in cognitive dissonance.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 1 year 6 weeks ago
    Sooner Or Later
    Page Paul Hein
    "awarded him damages of C$30,000" Don't forget, from the taxpayers, people who didn't commit the crime of uttering the word "God" in that meeting. We are certainly in Heinlein's "Crazy Years". Only question is what to do. I tend toward Mencken's preference: "Here (in America) the daily panorama of human existence, of private and communal folly, the unending procession of governmental extortions and chicaneries, of commercial brigandages and throat slittings, of theological buffoneeries, of aesthetic ribaldries, of legal swindles and harlotries, of miscellaneous rogueries, villanies, imbecilities, grotesqueries, and extravagances is so inordinately gross and preposterous, so perfectly brought up to the highest conceivable amperage, so steadily enriched with an almost fabulous daring and originality, that only a person born with a petrified diaphram can fail to laugh himself to sleep every night and wake up with all the eager, unflagging expectation of a Sunday-School superintendent touring the Paris peep-shows."
  • antiox's picture
    antiox 1 year 6 weeks ago Page Tim Hartnett
    I'm saying that impeding corporate bodies from using mass communication violates the first amendment. Which it does.
  • mjackso6's picture
    mjackso6 1 year 6 weeks ago Page Tim Hartnett
    "SECTION 1. We the people who ordain and establish this Constitution intend the rights protected by this Constitution to be the rights of natural persons. SECTION 2. The words people, person, or citizen as used in this Constitution do not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulation as the people, through their elected State and Federal representatives, deem reasonable and are otherwise consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution. SECTION 3. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people’s rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, freedom of association and all such other rights of the people, which rights are unalienable." Above is the text of the proposed amendment, taken directly from the web site linked in your article. Perhaps I'm missing something, or just being naive, but are you saying that corporations ~should~ be treated as actual persons? I fully agree that anyone should be able to throw away as much of his/her ~own~ money as they want, even on activities as pointless as politics. And certainly a corporation (a group of supposedly like-minded ~individuals~) shouldn't be barred from spending as much of it's assets as it's board of directors agrees to on any agreed-to endeavor, but that doesn't make the corporation a "person" or bestow upon it the status of "person-hood". Again, I might be missing something, but section three of the proposed amendment certainly seems to limit it's reach, leaving private individuals no worse off than they are now (which is to say, pretty bad). To this, I might add that I think it makes little difference. If I believed that the intent of the Constitution was to actually offer any real protections for 'citizens', or that citizens' votes actually had any real effect on the outcome of elections, I'd be a little more concerned. As it stands, I doubt that this, ~if~ it passes, will make any serious difference in the woeful state of affairs that we 'enjoy' today. If I've missed something, or my logic is just shot full of holes, please correct me; this isn't meant as snark, just my observations. Thank you for your article, sir. Mike Jackson
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 1 year 7 weeks ago Blog entry Alex R. Knight III
    Best of luck with it, Alex. Seeing it on Facebook, the DHS will have moved you up several levels on their Enemies List :-)   I love that A-symbol photo by Bryan Baucom.
  • ReverendDraco's picture
    ReverendDraco 1 year 7 weeks ago
    Sooner Or Later
    Page Paul Hein
    "“Look, sir, you are a man. You were born a man, and you will die a man." Funny - every time I see or hear the nausea-inducing phrase, "Caitlyn is a beautiful woman," I have much the same thought. . . "Bruce, we need to talk." "Call me Caitlyn." "Sorry, Bruce - not gonna happen. You're a man - horrifically mutilated, but a man nonetheless. Rocky Dennis? The Elephant Man? Ever hear of them? They're - both of them - saner than you. They were born, lived, and died as what they were. . . you should have taken a tip from them before you got yourself maimed." Along with transgender and transracial - now there's also "transchrono" - a person self-identifying as being of a different age than they actually are - and "transabled" - an otherwise healthy individual self-identifying as disabled. . . even going so far as to mutilate their bodies in order to make their "mind and body match." So, now a straight, white, female, 37 year old Jr. High teacher could have sex with multiple male students, and be celebrated for doing so - instead of, you know, being locked up - by claiming to be transgender transracial transchrono transabled. . . because they self-identify as a 14 year old gay paraplegic Asian male. According to the Jenner/Dolezal Principle - that what I claim trumps objective reality - this must be accepted - after all, who are judges and juries to tell them otherwise?
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 1 year 7 weeks ago
    Sooner Or Later
    Page Paul Hein
    I keep wondering when enough will be enough; people can only take so much.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 1 year 7 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    I agree, Saul, that "the coercive vaccine program is one of the most important libertarian issues of our time".  This imposing vaccines on everybody falls in line with the complete takeover by the state of the healthcare industry and eventually all individual medical decisions.  The "science is settled" meme reveals a profound naivete similar to the global warming cult, but infinitely more dangerous and pervasive.  The childish trust many people have of men in white coats to make decisions for them has become all too common; now they back men with guns to force that trust on others.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 8 weeks ago Blog entry Don Stacy
    Molyneux produces some good videos. This was one of his not-so-good ones. He spent much of his 6 minutes hu-rah-ing California teachers' union (not that I support teachers' unions in any manner). But his points were well taken. I ceased use of the term "rights" years ago. I make choices. There are many in this unfree world who would interfere with choices I make. Some of those obstructions may themselves be well taken. For instance, if I infringe upon your person or your property or breach contracts or agreements, you may rightly react negatively. So, (particularly now that I'm old and feeble :-[) to avoid getting my butt whipped I'll treat you with respect. You have that right -- do you not??? :-] Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 8 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    I find myself falling into the same "mistaken affiliation" syndrome from time to time. I might post a controversial essay or article or video here and/or on other forums, and a few will always interpret that to mean that I endorse the gist of the piece; when in fact I was pointing out what "the competition" were saying in contrast to what "we" believe. And you've placed your finger on the pulse of why STR has gone backward recently. That sort of childish bickering and accusation resulted in at least one "guru" leaving the playing field to start his own "forum", which itself failed. We don't have lobbyists or large financial means with which to "tell our story". We're against collectivist thinking from the very start. Therefore, (as though I have any authority to speak for "us") it behooves us to abstain from squabbling in the same manner that we abstain from beans. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 8 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    "...The science that supports the message is what gets funded and reported, the rest is portrayed as "junk."..." You got that right. I began to look at "science" with skepticism many years ago -- long before I entered the canyon of anarchy. I often refer to my 5 year-old great granddaughter as one of the few remaining "genuine" scientists. If she proclaims, "Grandpa! Your breath stinks!" (within hearing of the entire scientific community), I can be certain mouthwash is indicated. Sam
  • D. Saul Weiner's picture
    D. Saul Weiner 1 year 8 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    Money is extremely important here, as elsewhere, but there is another dimension to it that also ought to be of keen interest to libertarians. I have not seen anyone else write about this. The vaccine program is extremely valuable to the government itself. It conditions people to submit to the demands of the State, from birth. It conditions people to the necessity of forced collectivism, much like a major war does. In effect, it sends the message at a deep level that you need to sacrifice yourself and your children for the sake of the collective, in order to survive. This type of conditioning pays off greatly, as once one accepts it in principle, one is willing to sacrifice in many different ways for the sake of the State (e.g. one's income, one's dignity at the airport, one's liberty in general). Also of great importance is that when people have been brainwashed into thinking that the State has protected them from debilitating and deadly diseases, naturally they feel a great sense of gratitude for this and will be much more loyal to it. After all, the State has "given you" life and health ... it has God-like powers and so naturally we will tend to be in awe of it. In my view, the coercive vaccine program is one of the most important libertarian issues of our time, for all of the reasons mentioned. It is really unfortunate that relatively few libertarians seem to recognize what is at stake here. Most, it seems, have not really grappled at all with these issues.
  • TheMPP's picture
    TheMPP 1 year 8 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    Great essay (February was also when we did our episode on this topic).  All of those what-if questions should be part of the public discourse.  Sadly, they are not, for many of the reasons you mentioned.  Science likes to believe it has cornered the market on objectivity, but the reality is, when money is involved, it trumps everything else.  The science that supports the message is what gets funded and reported, the rest is portrayed as "junk." But there are still two sides to this debate, no matter how "fringe-y" they both end up looking to the other.  Curiously, the same is true for climate change.
  • D. Saul Weiner's picture
    D. Saul Weiner 1 year 8 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    Discussion is good. In fact, I would LOVE to see a substantive debate about the pros and cons of vaccination. But the provax forces are working 24/7 to prevent that from happening. They are giving you all kinds of talking points, platitudes, and no actual solid information upon which to make an informed decision. Worse, they are scapegoating and villifying their opponents and not giving them a forum to make their case. So it creates a climate where there really is no room for intelligent discussion. It creates a mob with pitchforks. Now, as a libertarian, I say "to each his own". You want to vaccinate yourself and/or your kids, fine. You don't, fine. You want to persuade others peacefully to your side, fine. But when the calls go out for coercion, that is where the "live and let live" mentality changes. At that point, the State has effectively declared war on us and our families. I wrote a column for this site a few months back because I recognized that (most) libertarians are not well-informed on this topic. I would encourage you to check it out, if you have not done so already. As libertarians, we ought to be skeptical of aggression of all types, of government propaganda in general, of the central planning of health care decisions, of government agencies doing the science and telling us what it all means, of medical fascism (its partnership with Big Pharma and Big Medicine) and of government scapegoating of dissidents when its programs fail. And we ought to speak out against all of this. We should not do anything to cheer on the mob.  
  • TheMPP's picture
    TheMPP 1 year 8 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    Not sure why you're disappointed.  It sparked some discussion, which is the point of this site, right?  Appreciate the feedback.  You might be interested in a recent episode of our show where we talk about vaccination.
  • D. Saul Weiner's picture
    D. Saul Weiner 1 year 8 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    You got that right:  http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article24913978.html  
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 1 year 8 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    It must suck to be a bureaucrat in Keene. :D My experience with so-called "low tax" entities like NH is that they make up for it with numerous and higher fees and charges for everything so that those two goons can get paid, pensioned & insured.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 8 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    Nothing is surprising when you consider who are the many very largest lobbying groups and their representatives. "Money Talks -- and Bullshit Walks" Not that any of the editors at STR necessarily would fall in line. It's just that the pressure to go along with intellectual blackmail terms such as "antivaxer" is overwhelming. It almost equates with appearing "anti-gay" in its propensity. You can rest assured there will soon be "laws" in place making it virtually impossible for individuals to remain individuals. I'll again recommend reading the late Delmar England's Insanity As the Social Norm. Sam
  • D. Saul Weiner's picture
    D. Saul Weiner 1 year 8 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    Wow, I am really disappointed to see a link to this article on STR. Up until now, STR has been sympathetic to the movement of people who are skeptical about the government's vaccine program and especially the efforts of the State to impose medical procedures on people against their will. The timing could not be worse. CA is one signature away from denying access to public and private schools (SB277) to kids who do not follow the CDC schedule. There is good reason to believe that, in the future, they will go after the homeschoolers as well and then adults. All because (supposedly) fewer than 200 people got the measles and everybody recovered. WTF. And, in all likelihood, other states will follow, if not the whole country. So (apparently) one activist became unhinged, so that means it is time to smear and discredit the entire movement with an article that could not be more biased? After the WW2 tribunals when the horrors of Nazi medical experimentation came to light, the Nuremberg principles were set forth to cover the ethics required for medical experimentation and they were subsequently applied to medical procedures in general. Their cornerstone is informed consent. That principle is now being trashed with this law (though, in fact, it had already been partially violated in the past, in the way that the vaccine program has been administered). So yes, the comparisons to Nazi Germany are entirely appropriate. Many parents, who have seen their kids injured or killed by vaccines in the past, and thus know that they are extremely vulnerable to them, are being told by the State to play Russian Roulette with their kids. Any decent person who understands what is going on ought to be outraged at the very thought of this. But libertarians especially, whose philosophy is largely based on consent, should be especially appalled.  
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 9 weeks ago Page Lawrence Samuels
    "Shouldn’t peace devotees have more in common with the Zero-Aggression Principle than advocates of single-party political structures that are prone to violence, and opposes democracy and human rights?" "...can advocates of violence become icons for peace?..." As Thomas Pynchon is quoted, "...If they can keep you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers." ~Thomas Pynchon http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/235.Thomas_Pynchon Since the definition of "government" is coercion and aggression, I can't see that there can ever be such a thing as a genuine "peace movement" if any in that "movement" advocate monopoly state, or political action, in any way, shape or form. Non-aggression, or zero-aggression statements ("principles") sound good, but the state must first be eradicated. To this extent I agree totally with our old friend, Jim Davies. Sam
  • Steve's picture
    Steve 1 year 9 weeks ago Page Steve
    A few days ago (22 June 2015) Tom Woods of The Mises Institute interviewed Jonathan Haidt: http://tomwoods.com/podcast/ep-429-is-reason-enough-why-your-opponents-w... Again arose that common objection: But we libertarians are caring--it's our policies that will truly help the poor. Haidt addressed it fairly well.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 1 year 9 weeks ago Page Lawrence Samuels
    Way to go, Lawrence.  The Peace movement in the US has been all but dead for the past 30 years or so; one reason is because it was hijacked by "revolutionaries" that are only opposed to the use of violence against them.  A principled stand against violence requires one to live by those principles,  Of course advocating violence against one's enemies does not a peaceful person make.  How can anybody promoting peace not advocate for non-aggression?  What these revolutionaries seek is not peace, but power - especially political power.
  • Thunderbolt's picture
    Thunderbolt 1 year 9 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    Right again, Dr. Hein. Glenn Greenwald says he is quick to ask for all passwords to email accounts, to make the same point. The camera in the bathroom paints a vivid picture. Sam is correct that we are dealing with psychopaths, who appear eager to have a little nuclear war with Russia. That should be fun.
  • Thunderbolt's picture
    Thunderbolt 1 year 9 weeks ago Page Lawrence Samuels
    Important issue, Lawrence. I note with some interest that we have Che alive and well in this country (USA). Fascists, Marxists, and Communists have ruled this country for many years. Millions of people have died in various countries. Our current ruler is distinguished by having whacked a few completely innocent Americans, presumably because of race or religion, or both. A sixteen year old kid from Denver comes to mind. He had the misfortune to have an unusual name. He was, of course, an evil skateboarder.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 9 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    "...Your remark is lost on me..." If you read the (2007) linked article, it should come clear. "Mainstream" (media, "education", religion, et al.) have from time immemorial been motivated to discourage individualism. To embrace individualism is portrayed as akin to insane behavior. The individualist is the anathema of the state. Nobody has a "right" (whatever that's supposed to mean) to think for himself or herself. Therefore, every berserk killer must be labeled "loner". The association is an absolute necessity. We anarchists are mostly all "loners". It's the nature of anarchy. As such, we interchange more peacefully and constructively in a free marketplace by our very natures than do those steeped in statolatry. That very fact makes us dangerous to the superstition of statism. For if a plurality of individuals were ever to seriously question whether "the state" is really productive of order, popular support for government would almost instantly collapse. The enormity of the truth is incredible. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 9 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    One additional comment: You pay those would-be and professing "rulers" homage with use of the term "strangers". I see that as a bit mild. My tendency is to go along with the increasing number of individuals who are seeing them as psychopaths. Sam
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 9 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    Samarami. Your remark is lost on me.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 9 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    Unable to recall yesterdays reading, but did come from Jews for the Protection of gun rights. Author presented documentation that the greatest group of Mass Murders are individuals who are mentally ill or are loaded with dangerous drugs which the drug companies do not release all the side effects How does one legitimately correlate mass murder by mentally sick people to law abiding citizens. Currently I have been unable to discover rage shootings by law abiding citizens with mass murder or even inappropriate firearm use except for emotionally distraught LEO's.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 9 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    Good approach to basic, critical thinking, Paul. Most who know me would be disappointed if I ever did a thing, or refrained from a thing, because it was a law, a rule, a regulation or a policy. I'll go along with things that make sense (to me). When they do not, and you can't explain (to me) why you're "mandating" the thing, I'll not follow it. On the other hand, as an entrepreneur I generally follow "...the customer is always right..." rule. As your contractor or your employee I see you as my customer. If I want to continue in your employ I will follow your dictates to the best of my ability. If too much of what you require seems senseless, I have the "right" (whatever that's supposed to mean) to quit and seek employment elsewhere (find a more satisfactory customer). That leaves me with the freedom to not whine and moan over the white man's machinations. I refuse to give him emotional power over me. If he wishes to install cameras on every street corner (and more than a few men's or ladies' rooms no doubt) I smile and move along. I am a sovereign state. Therefore, I am not in the white man's employ. He has no more "power" over me than any ordinary, free-market, gun-toting robber. There are many benefits of the free-market robber over the proclaimed state agent; but that's a topic for other threads at another time. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 9 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    "Lone-Wolf" ur ignorant mainstream butts: http://www.nysun.com/new-york/loners-vs-loneliness/52703/ Sam
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 11 weeks ago Web link KenK
    I am a re-loader and this new attempt by the House Boy leads me into the area of suicide (at most) or severe injury because I am restricted from accessing current information regarding reloading ammunition. Reloading is actually a simple process, yet there are technical aspects to re-loading that makes it extremely dangerous to the shooter. If I can only depend upon the old data I possess I cannot then advance my re-loading to achieve better ballistics and better accuracy with my loads. This is a Dictatorship. Whatever I call myself is mute. Mentally incompetent persons control our every actions. One can dream to be free of government, or even proclaim themselves free, but the fact is, no one is free from the dictatorship of mentally incompetent morons collected together on the east coast. Lysander may say the Constitution is of no authority. Well he is damned well right and the incompetent morons have clearly demonstrated that fact. Those who want the Constitution to disappear have received their wish for the Constitution has effectively disappeared. We are finally evolving into a slave society to the government of the government, for the government and by the government.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 1 year 11 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    As well he should. When Mao Zhedong set the Red Guard cadres loose on Chinese university campuses among their first victims were the faculty and administration. We should be so lucky.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 1 year 11 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    I wonder what the drug warriors seized her personal vibrator for? That's the reason the story made the national headlines in the first place wasn't it? Without that titillating detail added on, the cops' confiscating all that unrelated property and holding it for going on year is just business as usual and would barely make news outside of  the local radio or dead tree newsprint.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 1 year 11 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    Wow. And people say that "miltary intelligence" is an oxymoron. :D
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 1 year 12 weeks ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    Nice review, Alex, and thanks for highlighting a pro-freedom SciFi collection I'd not seen before. Just bought a copy at Amazon and look forward to the read.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 1 year 12 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Thanks, Lawrence. Of course it's not so much a review as it is a commentary. BTW, the "Jupiter Ascending" Blu-Ray just hit store shelves.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 13 weeks ago
    Volunteer--Or Else!
    Page Paul Hein
    All psychopaths grouped under the mantle of "government" depend totally upon 1) belief, and 2) voluntary compliance. Were it not for the superstition that is "rulership", the tabernacle that is government would soon tumble down. It is all kept in place by what can be described as religious belief -- superstition. How do you imagine the recent political holiday called "Memorial Day" came into being? Or why it is placed where it is on the Gregorian calendar? If veterans (or families of slaughtered veterans) ever came to comprehend the egregiousness of their actions in carrying out what they call "serving", it would soon spell doom for those claiming "jurisdiction". Thus political holidays: "Memorial", "Independence", "Labor", "Veterans" -- even "Chr-stmas" fits neatly into the science of rulership and control of the docile masses. Bread and circuses. Cease, my friends. Sam
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 1 year 13 weeks ago
    Volunteer--Or Else!
    Page Paul Hein
    Tax is "voluntary" in the sense that the gov doesn't send a tax collector and a squadron of armed dragoons to our homes and doorsteps to collect the money, that's all. In the stilted lanuage of 18th century English and American politicos and their scribes, that the gov "trusts" you to just come in and pay it, or mail a check, etc., constituted voluntarily payment to their mind. Throughout  most of modern European and English history the King came to you to get paid, His tax clerks accompanied by armed men to emphasis the point that there was no discretion about the matter. By 18th century standards that was mighty nice of the gov to let you pay at your convenience But "voluntary" it ain't, everybody knows it, and I'm always surprised that professional resisters take that bound-to-lose tack.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 1 year 13 weeks ago
    Volunteer--Or Else!
    Page Paul Hein
    Terrific column, Paul. Excellent job of making clear the coecion underlying every State, briefly and entertainingly. Short enough to make a good hand-out, detailed enough to get under people's skin, I think.
  • Thunderbolt's picture
    Thunderbolt 1 year 13 weeks ago
    Volunteer--Or Else!
    Page Paul Hein
    Nice one, Dr. Hein. While in prison for failure to voluntarily contribute financially to the Iraqi and Afghani wars, I reached a similar conclusion. It is, I think, the central issue for nearly all the evil of government. Every person who pays income tax is complicit in the crimes of war by Bush and most of the other rulers. Jim Davies correctly points out that not paying income tax is not sufficient to bring down government, but it is a good start. It is easy to see why they prefer a cashless society. Perhaps Bitcoin will gain sufficient traction to make a difference. I am currently enamored of the concept of structuring all one's affairs as loans, which are not taxable. I can sell a product or provide a service in exchange for a loan. It is worth a thought or two, since it is not legally reportable or taxable, and it is legal, as far as I can tell. It would be glorious to die at age 100 heavily in debt(but off the books), and never having paid money to the mafia.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 1 year 13 weeks ago Web link A. Magnus
    Chomsky's probably right about that.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 13 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Interestingly, I eventually was able to google up a copy of the article by Jeff Berwick (in my opinion his best, written years before he became infected with statism) that had been posted in 2011 on a Yahoo Group message: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FPE/conversations/messages/61165 Jeff and Walter Block have gone whole-hog into political action, and justify themselves totally: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n4eNTINmk8 "Like-Falling-Off-A-Log" Keep your hand over your wallet pocket, Mates! Sam
  • mjackso6's picture
    mjackso6 1 year 13 weeks ago
    Untitled
    Page Joseph S. Bommarito
    I "served" for almost 20 years before my body gave up the ghost on me and forced me to retire. Thanks to unusual circumstances, it's only taken me a little over five years to understand the disservice that we all did (to everyone, everywhere, not just in the places listed above; the world is continually a worse and worse place thanks to that kind of blind "service"). I don't know that I'll ever exactly "forgive" myself. I can think of a myriad better ways I could have spent those two decades. On the other hand, if I had done differently, I'd never have met the mother of the children who I love, nor the woman who became the love of my life after the children's mother abandoned us all to return to Germany. So all I can do is accept the past as it is and hopefully help contribute to a better world for my children and everyone else. Mike Jackson
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 13 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Sam submitted a comment to this article at "The Economic Collapse". I doubt that it will ever see the light of day. Here it is: From the article: "...The real problem, of course, is our out of control spending..." "...We simply cannot afford to keep spending money like this..." Whenever an author uses "we" and "our" I can know s/he will neither discover nor address the root of the "problem" (quotes intended). I was going to link Jeff Berwick's "The Most Dangerous Word" ("we"). However, now that Jeff apparently considers himself a libertarian potentate, has chosen to dabble in political action (he's started spelling "libertarian" with a capital "L"), seems he's had second thoughts and taken the article out of the archives. But his essay included a link to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gy19YmQHHJU which sez it all. My spending is not out of control. Is yours? I can afford to spend "money" (or what they're calling it nowadays) like I spend it -- unless or until my resources threaten to give out, at which point I'll need to make other arrangements, which I can do. Can you? I strongly believe you have two ways out of this mess: 1) exorcize your superstition (if you still cling to it) that you have "representation" over in a place they're calling District of Collectivism...er, Columbia. You don't. 2) Abstain from beans http://www.anarchism.net/anarchism_abstainfrombeans.htm Sam Seems many of these blogs will only entertain thoughts along party lines. Mine seldom meet that criteria. Sam
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 1 year 14 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Glen, thank you for this excellent detailed and incisive review!
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 14 weeks ago Page Douglas Young
    Astute of you to point that out, Mark. But as a retired educator, I can tell you that if you are going to teach "political science and history" under the auspices of Georgia Board of Regents you are not going to even save a niche in a corner of your brain for the possibility of anarchy. It ain't in the cards, even though anarchy is all about us. Larken Rose says it far more eloquently than I: few can even imagine not falling to some degree under the "authority" of a ruling class. Yet there can be no legitimate ruling class. Douglas does a good job lambasting the "lefties", stays relatively clear of denigrating the "righties", but never addresses the choice or the ramifications of 100% self ownership -- anarchy. I'm pro-life. I'm also pro-choice. The immediate reaction of most to the former self-proclamation is to group me with the "religious right". And to the latter I'll fall under the category of "progressive left" (whatever "progressive" is supposed to mean). I'm neither. I like the way our old and late friend, Harry Browne put it: Conservatives vs Liberals Conservatives say government cannot end poverty by force, but they believe government can use force and threats of violence to make people moral. Liberals say government cannot make people moral, but they believe government can use force and threats of violence to end poverty (redistribute wealth). Neither group attempts to explain why government is so clumsy and destructive in one area but a paragon of efficiency and benevolence in the other. ~Harry Browne Liberty A-Z p 35 I've said forever (almost) that the family is the only legitimate governing unit. All others are coercive interlopers. The human newborn -- unlike newborns in the "animal kingdom", who come into life with a factor we call "instinct" -- comes into life totally helpless, completely under the "jurisdiction" (again, whatever you think "jurisdiction" means) of adult caregivers; ideally a loving and dedicated Mom and Dad. Mom and/or Dad may one day in their dotage come under the "jurisdiction" of the now-grownup kids. I genuinely salute Douglas Young, however, for writing this nice essay. STR definitely needs more articles that can give rise to comment from all sides of the spectrum. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 14 weeks ago Page Douglas Young
    One additional reflection on Douglas Young's essay that I just noticed is in connection with the "quote for the day" on the STR main page: "It is strangely absurd to suppose that a million of human beings, collected together, are not under the same moral laws which bind each of them separately." ~ Thomas Jefferson I've ceased use of the term "moral laws", and generally refer to good or bad choices instead. I don't see myself as having jurisdiction to define "good" or "bad" for you or others, except as it might relate to my being personally aggressed upon. Not that I think it's "moral", or "good" to aggress upon others who are not related in any way to me. On the other hand, as I inferred in my comment above, loving parents will naturally work to instill into the behaviors of their children what we might think of as "morality". For openers, nobody wants a pregnant teenage daughter. The only thing that differentiated the Jeffersons and Washingtons from the Obamas, Bushes and Clintons was time, modern-day travel, and technology. Jefferson could not have conceived of the NSA, but slavery appeared to serve him well in his time. So Jefferson's utterance appears to those intuitively longing for central political authority (as long as it is tame and non-coercive [ha!]) -- as being wise, contributive to liberty and freedom. I tend to reflect on that whenever I see "libertarians" quote what appear to be wise and freedom-loving old tyrants. Because Jefferson's statement amounted to an eery prophesy for all central political authority everywhere at each period of history. Jefferson understood the futility of passing laws and enacting rules to govern bad behaviors (and bad thoughts) of the unnamed and unconscripted pioneers in the unexplored "west". Not a problem for the Obamas of the 21st century. I could go on, but this makes the point. Sam
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 1 year 14 weeks ago Page Douglas Young
    You lost me at "within the law" as a qualifier for freedom of choice in a free society.  Once you accept the dictates of politicians as "the law" to be obeyed, then quibling over the individual laws they dictate is nothing more than an academic exercise in futility.  That's closing the barn door after the horses have run out.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 1 year 14 weeks ago Web link TheMPP
    Subscription required, so I couldn't read this all the way through.  So whatever. I don't expect a paper/digital constitutional arrangement to work any better on Mars than the various arrangements we have in force now.