Recent comments

  • Bill Ross's picture
    Bill Ross 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    I seriously take issue with Edward Hudgins interpretation, although his points regarding Avartars being proxies for Haliburton, Oil, etc have merit. It is his equating of free enterprise with the "right" to exploit, steal property from and kill intelligent beings whom have been defined as savages (ie; Jews, by Nazis) that I take issue with. Therefore, because of this false definition of free enterprise, Avator is NOT an attempt by the left to discredit "free enterprise", but disputes the concept and morality of imperial rape and pillaging of peoples and environment. When the people are inevitably forced into self-defense, yes, they can be spun as "unreasonable savages" (if you ignore the history of provocation). The messages I take away from Avatar (best Imax experience ever) are: a) If you choose conflict, better understand your enemy - they may be able to defeat you b) No matter how peaceful your prey, at some point, their tolerance will be exceeded. Predators are a survival hit. c) Honest trade is the most profitable. Conflict is an unsustainable cost, unprofitable (except for those who profit) in the long run d) We have only one planet and should be trustees. As on planet Earth (doomed), the problem on Pandora (happy ending) is predators, who have slipped the leash of public control, reason and the "rule of law": http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/ross/ross3.html
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 7 years 28 weeks ago
    The Year Ahead: 2010
    Page Glen Allport
    Hi Bill Walker: I didn't say we would run out of food: I said we might have a food SHORTAGE that would raise prices (independently of other forces that raise prices, such as monetary inflation and global population growth). Evidence is strong that this is a real possibility in the next year or two, and in any case: there are many millions of people around the world who ALREADY cannot get enough food to prevent malnutrition and even starvation. When you live in a wealthy society and don't have such problems, it seems silly that shortages could be around the corner, but -- as I pointed out in the column -- more than 37 million in the US are already unable to feed themselves without assistance. I expect that number to grow, and if foodstocks are lower than expected, the shortage will contribute to higher prices. But yes: you, personally, will probably still be able to eat. As for me, I put in a garden last year, so I'm hopeful that I'll be able to eat also. As for oil, here again I am not saying we'll "run out" of oil. There will be oil available a century from now; the question is whether new sources of oil will come online in a timely fashion and in sufficient quantity to satisfy demand in a world of rapidly-growing population and with huge nations (India and China, in particular) ramping up their use of oil so fast it makes your head spin. China -- where no one but Party bigshots had cars in the recent past -- is already a larger market for new cars than the US. [ http://www.miamiherald.com/business/international/story/1372479.html ]. Individual examples of oil production in particular places are meaningless; the global oil supply is struggling to meet demand and even IF it can keep up over the next few years, new sources of oil are, on average, a LOT more expensive to harvest and to refine than oil has been in the past. Ergo, the expectation for higher prices (not to mention the forces of monetary inflation and population growth) and probably for shortages. Not "running out of oil", but shortages of oil. During the '73 oil embargo the shortfall of oil was a mere 5% compared to what we'd had available before the embargo, and the results were lines around the block for gasoline, 5-gallon limits at many stations, odd/even rationing (based on one's license plate number), and other annoyances. And, of course, a huge uptick in prices, a recession, higher unemployment, and so on. I was there; I remember.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Guest
    Donation wouldn't count as disposal?
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Guest
    I just love paying taxes. I love a government that threatens me with violence if I don't "volunteer" a portion of my income. I love a system of sales, marketing and "brand dilution" that encourages disposal of perfectly good commodities rather than dropping prices. How much of this disposal practice falls under the "disposal of obsolete inventory" in the Universal Accounting Procedures where the full-book value is deducted from sales? Would any serious company engaged in the very serious business of making a profit care about some "brand dilution" nonsense (come on, IT'S WAL-Mart and H&M here, folks) if it were not an advantage on the bottom line, and hence, the total tax liability? Of COURSE they wouldn't. They'd maximize every sale, every possible margin. So the next time you see someone that needs warm clothes, blame the IRS. Thank you, Stefan Molyneux and Frederic Bastiat for making this one exceptionally easy to diagnose.
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 7 years 28 weeks ago
    Only Cowards Vote
    Page Per Bylund
    You swing from your tree, and I'll swing from mine....funny we all act like monkeys sometimes. Voting monkeys....
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 7 years 28 weeks ago Page Bill Walker
    Great column, Bill! Spot-on analysis and the writing is a joy, to boot.
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 7 years 28 weeks ago
    The Year Ahead: 2010
    Page Glen Allport
    What are you going to do, crawl up in a hole someplace and wait to die? This essay is so well researched, so valid that we can only say it confirms what we know to be intrinsically true, that the "world feels wrong" as Will Groves wrote here about a year ago. If your brother be damned, you love him no less--and we are damned together by the "will" of the "majority." So let it be said that there was fair warning, that there were a few like minds dissenting to the machinations of "modern" economics and that we went on living, preparing. Who can guess the end game of all of this? Certainly not me, but I think we can all agree it will not be pleasant. If I have faith, it is in our ingenuity and our willingness to trade with one another. Hold fast to an axiom: despite the threat of violence, despite man's laws, despite the "will" of the people it remains a fact that we cannot "make" each other conform to what we think is correct. At most, we can persuade and I think you make our case very well here Mr. Allport.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 7 years 28 weeks ago
    Only Cowards Vote
    Page Per Bylund
    Great column, Per, as always. You've over-simplified just a bit, though. Voting is mostly a way to disempower the people, yes, and a way to hide the cruelty of State coercion behind a mask of pseudo-legitimacy. Voters are generally participating in tyranny and aggressing against their fellows. But there ARE times when voters are offered a chance to REDUCE or even ELIMINATE some portion of the State. For example: You live in South Carolina in 1850, and a statewide proposition is on the ballot to END slavery. Do you refrain from voting, or do you vote to free the slaves? Voting to REDUCE or ELIMINATE tyranny is not aggression toward others; it is at the very least an expression of brotherhood with those being oppressed, and a way to possibly improve the situation in a non-violent manner. Wouldn't it be nice if the South had ended slavery on its own via the ballot box (not that Lincoln gave a bleep about the slaves, of course; that isn't what the war was about but still: it would have been terrific if slavery had been ended prior to 1865 and without bloodshed). A more recent, less dramatic (but real) example: Prop 13 in California (1978). From the Wikipedia article on the subject: "The proposition's passage resulted in a cap on property tax rates in the state, reducing them by an average of 57%. In addition to lowering property taxes, the initiative also contained language requiring a two-thirds majority in both legislative houses for future increases in all state tax rates or amounts of revenue collected, including income tax rates. It also requires two-thirds vote majority in local elections for local governments wishing to raise special taxes. Proposition 13 received an enormous amount of publicity, not only in California, but throughout the United States.[2]" Dramatically reducing taxes and making it harder to RAISE taxes is a good thing indeed; not anything like "freedom" but still something that reduced tyranny in a real, on-the-ground way and which allowed many Californians to keep their homes when they'd been on the verge of being taxed out of them. By now, other sources of tyranny have wrecked CA beyond what most would have believed back in '78, so yes: as long as the State remains, it is a danger, and it always strives to grow. But opposing State power via the ballot box with Prop 13 did slow the growth of tyranny and improved lives for many Californians for many years. It was NOT a form of aggression in any fashion. I am aware of arguments that such partial victories are counter-productive, and I don't agree with them. The voters (and non-voters) who benefited from Prop 13 could and would have waited until they were dead for a Stateless society to come along and free them from their slavery. ABOLITION of all forms of initiated coercion is my goal, but I have no quarrel with those who want whatever reductions in tyranny they can actually get in their own lifetimes. My point is that voting can, in rare cases, be used in support of freedom, and in those rare cases it is not merely non-aggression but perhaps even a moral duty. Voting in favor of human rights and for the reduction of tyranny is NOT the same as voting to increase or re-arrange an existing tyranny, which is why the chance to do so is very rare. The many arguments against voting do not sway me in such cases. I discussed the subject in more detail in To Those Who Vote, and Those Who Don't: http://www.strike-the-root.com/71/allport/allport21.html
  • Bill Walker's picture
    Bill Walker 7 years 28 weeks ago
    The Year Ahead: 2010
    Page Glen Allport
    We aren't going to run out of food... even if the crops were halved, we could just eat more vegetables and less meat. We aren't going to run out of oil, either; check out the Shell plant in the Gulf that makes diesel out of natural gas for $25 a barrel. Nor are we going to run out of uranium or thorium... though only the Chinese may be allowed to build nuclear plants. Of course if the US keeps giving a couple trillion to bankers and blowing another trillion on foreign adventures every year, we may not be able to BUY any food. But there will be plenty around.
  • Bill Ross's picture
    Bill Ross 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Guest
    Why? Its simple really: law of supply and demand. Demand falls (economy sucks), supply goes up, given competition, price must fall. Solution: destroy excess supply, try to match supply to demand, to maintain price. Same way war economically works (for some, basic secondary school math required): http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/ross/ross1.html
  • Bill Ross's picture
    Bill Ross 7 years 28 weeks ago
    The Year Ahead: 2010
    Page Glen Allport
    When you get down to basics, Glen's points are consequences of choices (made / tolerated) that have increased the ratio of greed to productive economic activity far beyond fatal. In the eternal war between the greedy (those who consume more than they produce) and the productive (those who produce more than they consume), the greedy are winning. This is the root cause of the rise (honesty in control) and fall (predators in control) of civilizations. Easily proven: http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/ross/ross1.html
  • GregL's picture
    GregL 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Guest
    This is the first time I have even seen anything about this story. Thanks for linking to it. Assuming it is true, imagine the outcry and how the U.S. might respond if children in this country were intentionally killed by foreign operatives.
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Christopher Lempa
    I would say, , don't allow oneself to become chained to repetition in the first, though easier said than done if you were late to notice and found the debt payments the only reason to attend. The only advice worth taking in this article imo is to " head out the door at the first opportunity". Life is for Living, that doesn't mean suffering :)
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Cheryl Cline
    Quote: It is truly sad when someone in a position of authority can make such a statement. My sentiments exactly, West is obviously a very twisted individual, and of course, is the kind of machine mind the state is happy to have fill a position of influence, oddly, today such lunacy is an order of egotistical piggery that's very noticably in ascendancy in post's of power.
  • Guest's picture
    SpykerSpeed (not verified) 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Cheryl Cline
    I've read in other places that the woman pressing charges is the wife of a cop. So this outcome makes total sense. Anybody seen the movie "Lakeview Terrace"? Scary stuff.
  • Persona non grata's picture
    Persona non grata 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Cheryl Cline
    Anyone for coffee?
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Christopher Lempa
    Not much fun being a wage slave.
  • DennisLeeWilson's picture
    DennisLeeWilson 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Christopher Lempa
    The author has NO coherent idea of the nature of capitalism.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 7 years 28 weeks ago Page Marcel Votlucka
    @ReverendDraco: Can you explain how you, personally, have honestly acquired all of the public land within the borders of the United States? That is an interesting concept. If you have a claim to all that land, then so do I, and I hereby invite anyone interested in visiting to be my guest. Does your wish to keep them off "our" land override my invitation to them? I see some problems here in your definition of property rights.
  • strike's picture
    strike 7 years 28 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    We're going to use a different system from now on, and our developer just hasn't set it up yet.
  • DennisLeeWilson's picture
    DennisLeeWilson 7 years 28 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    Until Dec 30, I received STR in my email box. Has that feature been removed?
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 7 years 28 weeks ago Page Roger Young
    The frustration in Roger's latest blog entry practically clubs us over the head. What I really admire most about Roger's writing is that he doesn't pull punches. He's direct and to-the-point and there is very little room for misinterpretation. Most Americans, if confronted with the question of why these soldiers died will say, "they died for our freedom" despite the litany of evidence that shows just the opposite.
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link strike
    Cheer up! There is good reason to believe that the monkeys will soon begin eating themselves with their ridiculous "altruistic" schemes. The most valuable lesson or truism we can take from the pervasive entitlement mindset currently plaguing this land is that we must feed ourselves and provide for our own well being so that if we VOLUNTARILY want to help others we are able. There will NEVER be enough tax, laws or force for the monkeys to take what they want. Their systems will fail and we'll all, on average, get about 60-80 years of life if all goes well. Let's make sure it is a life lived well and that no matter what the monkeys take by force (explicit or implied) we voices of dissent refuse to participate in monkey schemes like voting and "social justice" by way of begging for a few scraps back from what was rightfully ours to begin with.
  • NoTax's picture
    NoTax 7 years 28 weeks ago Page S.E. Seachman
    Most of these programs started in 1964 with LBJ's "War on poverty." What's interesting to note is that 1964 was the last year that there was silver content in U.S. coins. Previous to 1965 coins had a 90% silver content. Fiat money and the welfare state go hand in hand.
  • John Martin's picture
    John Martin 7 years 28 weeks ago Page Bill Butler
    A broker recently told me that the American dollar will crash within two years. Welcome to Zimbabwe!
  • hmk14's picture
    hmk14 7 years 28 weeks ago Page Marcel Votlucka
    Your point is valid except for the example of same-sex marriage. Even there you are correct except for the question: "Will you be the one denying me the license?" Of course the answer is no, it would be the state denying the license and that is the whole point. The same sex marriage debate isn't about what people do, or whetherthey can engage in whatever private ceremonies they want to with any other consenting adult. The debate is whether gays ought to qualify for the state entitlements presently only offered to straight married couples. The true libertarian position is that the state ought not to be in the marriage licensing business at all and ought not to be bestowing entitlements on anyone based on what, if any, personal relationships they have entered into with others. Jumping on the pro-same-sex-marriage bandwagon is an opportunistic sell out of libertarianism in a crude attempt to curry favour with gay rights proponants. If you think that's going to swell the ranks of libertarian movement why not explain to them what the libertarian position would be on owners of private property such as restaurants and hotels discriminating against gays. Or are you willing to twist libertaran principles to the detriment of the property owner's rights as well?
  • John Martin's picture
    John Martin 7 years 28 weeks ago Page Marcel Votlucka
    People need to understand the definition of a right. We all have the same rights. We all have rights to do things for ourselves--the rights to travel, buy and sell, earn livings, manage our lifestyles, raise our children, manage our property, etc. We do NOT have any rights to FORCE others to provide things for us--i.e education, housing, food, health care. We do NOT have any rights to initiate force, steal or meddle with the persons, property, or lifestyles of others.
  • jd-in-georgia's picture
    jd-in-georgia 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    Thomas Jefferson is credited with saying, "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." The more I hear, see, and read about these kinds of government actions, I wonder if we will ever truly have liberty?
  • John Martin's picture
    John Martin 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link strike
    Whether people are fat or not is a moot point. The entire food stamp program is an unconstitutional, communist FRAUD that should be entirely eliminated. The same applies to 'public' education, 'public' housing, health care, welfare, foreign aid, abusive safety and environmental regulations, drug, gambling, and 'porn' prohibitions, useless 'wars' in Korea, Vietnam, and the middle east, anti-climate change 'treaties,' and other garbage.
  • ReverendDraco's picture
    ReverendDraco 7 years 28 weeks ago Page S.E. Seachman
    I have read, in more than one place (please don't ask me where, I read so much it's almost impossible to keep track), that only in the US is obesity a sign of poverty. In any other nation, the poor are scrawny, half-starved, walking skeletons - in the US, they "are closer to Aretha Franklin or Oprah during her binge years." Entitlement-minded Sheeple. . .
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    Don't forget to mention the ski masks and other identity camouflage they've taken to wearing too. Sad.
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Robert Fredericks
    the nobody vote i a good idea, though having Never voted (or ever will) i have no need to give my if i would have vote to any, even if it would be nobody, as nobody should get the vote under any circumstance voting has ceased to exist so much so i have to look for the word in a dictionary every time i hear/see it :)
  • livemike's picture
    livemike 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Christopher Lempa
    If they're primary business is farming then they're net tax-feeders. That's what subsidy is all about.
  • ReverendDraco's picture
    ReverendDraco 7 years 28 weeks ago Page Marcel Votlucka
    You had me until this: "shooting people who try to scale a border fence." As far as I'm concerned, that's Trespassing, and when you trespass, you *should* expect to backstop 00. There should be consequences to violating someone else's property. Not that the property involved belongs to "the Government," (it doesn't) but that it belongs to ALL Citizens - and the Property Owners have said, No Trespassing. Let's look at this on a smaller scale - you and 4 of your friends own a chunk of land. Even if 4 of the owners think that Trespassing should be allowed, it violates the property rights of the 5th owner if you 4 assisted Trespassers on the property. Add to that, using his honestly acquired resources to assist them (against his will), and limiting his ability to honestly acquire resources (by expecting him to work for the lower wages paid to Criminals on the lam), and the violation becomes even more egregious. . . It's one thing to ask politely to come on someone else's Property - it is another thing entirely to make the choice for them. 'Nuff Said.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    By far the most firearms-enabled deaths come from government itself: war, genocide, and simple murder of dissidents and others by the State. "Gun control" that would actually make us safer would be to remove guns from the hands of those working for the State; British bobbies (cops) and many small-town cops even in the US once did their jobs without carrying guns -- and people respected them for that, and actually felt some affection for them. When the hired help is armed to the teeth but the EMPLOYERS are denied weapons -- BY the hired help, in the form of politicians and the armed agents who enforce the laws -- then you have a serious and very dangerous situation.
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 7 years 28 weeks ago
    I'm Not A Terrorist
    Web link Robert Fredericks
    anyone with a defective electrical signal can crap on their neighbour for the cause when there's a war of land grabbing and mineral rights on the move
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 7 years 28 weeks ago
    I'm Not A Terrorist
    Web link Robert Fredericks
    being stopped by cops for taking a walk at 3am and being questioned as to why your doing it, well there's no friend just foe just as is so being frisked/scanned at an airport and that get's a little bigger, but being accused of being a terrorist is massive, but so is land grabbing and the mineral right's crusade, that'll stop at nothing.
  • livemike's picture
    livemike 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Robert Fredericks
    There is a group of people who think of themselves as being in "Al Quaeda" so it exists as much as any organisation does. The article states that the man "apparently" was connected to al quaeda and there is some appearance that he did. I'm not convinced myself but it's at least plausible. The article is worthwhile and a minor possible error in attributing blame is hardly worth trashing it for.
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 7 years 28 weeks ago
    I'm Not A Terrorist
    Web link Robert Fredericks
    would be about 10-12 years ago that i decided to take a walk oceanside, was around 3am, the cops appeared and asked me what i was doing, "walking" i replied, "why" they asked, "because i can" i said, "isn't a little late to be taking a walk" they said "i never realised i had a limit" was my reply, they looked at me oddly and drove away, what was i in their eyes but a possible potential danger to something, well i wasn't but their work doesn't allowfor anything but foe, shame, but that was of local consiquence, and in a pretty peaceable area at that, it was irritating being seen as a danger, much as is handing over a passport and being frisked, but even more so when your just being used as an excuse for land grabbing /mineral theft/crusade.
  • ALLEN090's picture
    ALLEN090 7 years 28 weeks ago Web link Christopher Lempa
    This piece doesn't make common sense. For every dollar Backman's family got back, how many did the government take? The author never even asks the question.
  • Bill Ross's picture
    Bill Ross 7 years 29 weeks ago Web link Robert Fredericks
    Aargh… Democracy has devolved to a periodic contest regarding which team are legitimate predators (most guns) and, who are legitimate prey (weakest, least politically popular) using ever changing pretexts. The current system is on the same extermination path as the Nazis and differs only in degree and therefore, the amount of time it takes social / economic collapse to occur. The Nazis were fools. It is more economically efficient but equally foolish to enslave as opposed to exterminate your prey. I agree wholeheartedly that the reasons for “none of the above” votes (no valid choices able to achieve “consent of the governed”) needs to be expressed, however, the system is FUBAR. The system is insane because it lacks the discipline of reality and is therefore at war against reality. In any contest with natural law (actions have inevitable consequences), REALITY wins, a “slam dunk”. The only question is: who benefits by the choices and who pays for the consequences? The “rule of law” used to insure that those who made the choices, reaped the consequences, good or bad. No more. Now, some are able to make and profit by choices which are illegal to all persons but the state and their connected cronies. Since all such profit resolves to theft from the productive, the grim reaper of “Mathematics of Rule” is and will continue to determine consequences: http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/ross/ross1.html Our far wiser ancestors correctly diagnosed the root cause of the rise and fall of civilization (the rules by which we cooperate for MUTUAL self-interest) as perpetual war between the productive (those who produce more than they consume) versus the greedy (those who consume more than they produce). They discovered and enforced the “rule of law”, to protect civilization (honest people trading) from criminals (predators, who achieve goals by force / fraud). This is now rationalized away, by criminals on the bench: http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/ross/ross3.html Justice Defined: We are all free to profit or suffer and learn (adapt to excellence) by facing the consequences of our OWN choices. Injustice is to be forced to suffer the consequences of choices of unaccountable (irresponsible) others.. “The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern. The law of liberty tends to abolish the reign of race over race, of faith over faith, of class over class.” ~ Lord Acton Charles Darwin also warned us: Survival EQUALS ability to adapt to environment EQUALS ability to choose correctly EQUALS freedom: http://www.strike-the-root.com/62/ross/ross1.html Returning to the democracy topic, there are two basic problems: choice is limited (a survival hit) and politics is not limited to “common interest” (all persons EQUALLY benefit and pay), creating a perpetual “divide and conquer war” between predators vying for “legitimacy”, to prey on the people. Until these two problems are solved, there is zero possibility that democracy can be “fixed”, ever. Natural factors “the unseen hand” are manifesting as social / economic collapse which MUST continue until the “rule of law” is re-asserted (or total collapse to anarchy) and predators reined in and democracy limited to “common interest”. Our ancestors suffered from “rule of corrupt man” and chose peace and survival for all over unchecked greed which inevitably leads to “survival for none”. Think about it: http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/ross/ross2.html
  • mkghandi's picture
    mkghandi 7 years 29 weeks ago
    I'm Not A Terrorist
    Web link Robert Fredericks
    Beware the people in uniform. They are the terrorists, and they blame you--their victim. That's how terrorism works. Until government is gone, we will continue to have terrorists. MKG
  • mkghandi's picture
    mkghandi 7 years 29 weeks ago Web link Robert Fredericks
    When any piece of journalism invokes 'al-Qaeda' it discredits itself in my mind. This article brought it up in the first sentence. Al Qaeda is a boogeyman. It does not exist. It's sole purpose is to induce fear in the lumpenproles, and to stifle discussion about the real sponsors of terror. Those real sponsors are the black ops agencies of governments pursuing an agenda of terrorizing the population so they won't resist other parts of the same agenda. The ultimate goal of the people invoking al Qaeda is world domination. It amazes me that Muslims fall for this deception. MKG
  • mkghandi's picture
    mkghandi 7 years 29 weeks ago Web link Robert Fredericks
    Decades ago somebody wrote a book called None of the Above, advocating putting that as a choice in all elections. Conditions today tell you how far that idea went. The problem with getting something like that on a ballot is that the voting process is controlled by corrupt politicians supported by an even more corrupt media who won't allow it to happen no matter what. Asking people to assert their own intent in not voting is cumbersome and impractical. Unless there is leadership and legitimate political processes, if you don't vote, the prevailing attitude that you are apathetic will prevail. Any leader who arises to promote this idea will be quickly struck down--either discredited, or will meet an unfortunate accident, or may even be 'suicided'. Until these tactics are discredited, we won't see any change. MKG
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 7 years 29 weeks ago Web link Cheryl Cline
    Quote : Such moral anesthesia is dangerous. It allows people who are scrupulously moral in their private lives to become rapacious plunderers in the voting booth. *If the libertarian movement did nothing other than strip away the euphemisms and get the electorate, including nonlibertarians, to come face-to-face with their moral tradeoffs, government would shrink dramatically* i see the above as the starting point, strip off the layers etc, plenty easier to make the change peacefully, otherwise keep an eye over your shoulder, big job and gradual methinks.
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 7 years 29 weeks ago Page tzo
    fair enough, not special or below midi level bad or tops but average, ok...and sad.
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 7 years 29 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    How to Win in Iraq and Afghanistan... ok if one want's to win i suppose, any losses ?
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 7 years 29 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Al Jazeera, if they told the truth i wouldn't believe them, media stench.
  • Guest's picture
    fromonesource (not verified) 7 years 29 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    Really happy to see the changes to the site. Please keep up the good work! A new design might be a useful next step to make it more visually appealing.
  • javieranton's picture
    javieranton 7 years 29 weeks ago Page tzo
    Exactly straight to the point, bravo!