The Shotgun Blog
« July 6, 2008 - July 12, 2008 |Main| July 20, 2008 - July 26, 2008 »
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Stephen "the minority government made me do it" Harper
In his latest column, John Williamson with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation writes “it is no contest between the Harper government's spending and that of Mr. Chrétien's government. The Grits exercised greater fiscal discipline.”
You can read John Williamson’s column here, but let me ask Shotgun readers a few questions:
Is the minority government situation really responsibly for this out-of-control Conservative spending?
Are Conservative partisans – volunteers, staffers, candidates, donors, bloggers – happy with their party’s performance, and, if so, why?
If the Conservatives are going to give us bigger and more intrusive government than the Liberals, why not take a chance on the Libertarian Party?
Posted by Matthew Johnston on July 19, 2008 in Canadian Conservative Politics | Permalink | Comments (56) | TrackBack
Friday, July 18, 2008
Just in from Tehran
I had asked a trusted friend of mine, who is gone back to Iran after several years, to update me on what's going on in Iran these days and we had a brief conversation a few days ago. That brief conversation is now featured on Reuters website. I thought it might be of Shotgun's readers interest to be informed about these issues.
Update: It seems that the comment section was somehow closed to readers. I apologize. The comment section is open and please feel free to discuss.
Posted by Winston on July 18, 2008 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack
After 200 years, Adam Smith is honoured in Edinburgh
On July 4th, a ceremony was held in Edinburgh, Scotland to unveil a statue of economist Adam Smith, 200 years after his death.
While the monument, paid for entirely with private money, was erected by the London-based Adam Smith Institute, a Calgary entrepreneur played an early and important role in honouring this neglected free market economist.
Read the Western Standard exclusive about how the invisible hand of entrepreneur Bob Lamond helped build a monument to the father of capitalism.
Posted by Matthew Johnston on July 18, 2008 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
The cadres vs. the truth
Inside Communist China: a good day for the cadres.
Outside Commmunist China: a good day for the truth.
Posted by D.J. McGuire on July 18, 2008 in International Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Obama and McCain on taxes
The Washington Post published the following chart comparing the tax proposals of John McCain and Barack Obama:
Politically, I'm thinking that this chart is going to benefit Obama more than McCain. While economics might be on McCain's side, the average person (the 60% in the bottom three groups) is definitely going to benefit more from Obama's plan than from McCain's, at least in the short term. Increasing taxes on the top income earners could and probably would have devastating long term impact, but I doubt most people are going to consider that.
But I could be wrong. What do you think?
Posted by Terrence Watson on July 18, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack
The Emmy Nominations
Emmy nominations came out today. The first conclusion that I can reach, based on them, is that I probably watch too much television - of the eleven shows nominated for either Best Drama or Best Comedy, I saw every episode of eight of them ("30 Rock", "Entourage", "The Office", "Boston Legal", "Damages", "Dexter", "Lost", "House", and "Mad Men.")
Overall, for once, I'm fairly pleased with the Emmy line-up. The only changes I would make in the top-line categories are that I would dump Boston Legal from the Drama line-up for "The Wire." Though, frankly, I can understand the position - the fifth and final season of "The Wire" was a little bit flat but, frankly, I'd have voted to nominate it simply in honour of its place in television history - and all of the times that it's been previously robbed. "Breaking Bad" would, I think, have made it - or deserved to make it - if it had had a full season. Seven episodes is too few, especially given the relatively abrupt wrap-up, to snag a drama nomination.
On the Comedy side I'd have made more changes. I don't understand why anyone watches "Two and a Half Men." I'd take away its nomination and, if it had to go to a traditional sitcom, I'd give it to "How I Met Your Mother." I'd probably also, even though I am a regular viewer, strip "Entourage" (which had a bit of an off season last year, I think) of its nod and hand it over to "Californication."
I realize that some people will brush this aside and dismiss television as "all trash." But I strongly disagree - in my view, especially given the changes that the industry as a whole is undergoing (the growth of cable and other new content distribution channels) I believe that this is the golden age of gripping, writer-driven television. Indeed, frankly I think that television over the last few years is the most exciting thing to hit the world of entertainment since the stuff coming out of Hollywood in the 1970's.
Indeed, this is particularly significant in my own case since I would argue that television, rather than Jazz or Rock & Roll, is the single best and most significant American form of art.
Posted by Adam T. Yoshida on July 18, 2008 in Film | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Greetings
Peter was kind enough to invite me to blog here. I already maintain and contribute to the University of Alberta Faculty of Law Blog, but the opportunity to blog here was quite exciting. I hope to post distinct entries on both blogs, but occasionally I may cross-list a posting.
By the way of background, I am an associate professor of law at the University of Alberta, where I am also the associate dean of graduate studies and the acting associate dean of research in the faculty. Having recently received tenure and recently been saddled with these long titles, my scholarship will now inevitably diminish. That being said, I did manage to produce some work in order to convince my colleagues that I am worthy of staying on here, and you can see my CV and links to some of my papers here.
I look forward to posting and hearing your comments both positive and negative. One thing, I should warn you, that I am prone to is hyperbole and exaggeration. I do this to provoke discussion, and I really do benefit (and many times revise my opinions based on) from comments.
Posted by Moin A Yahya on July 17, 2008 in Western Standard | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Nero Georgius Caesar W Augustus Bushus Germanicus
The New Editor is dead on with this great satire of the Obama New Yorker cover and reaction:
"Washington (Rooters) -- President Bush's Press Secretary Dana Perino
today denounced a January 2007 cover for The New Yorker magazine which
depicted George Bush as the Roman Emperor Nero.
A visibly angry Perino called the depiction of Bush "an ugly reminder of the often-repeated stereotype of the US as an empire and the president as an unaccountable tyrant who wears a toga, uses decorative leaves in his hair, and plays the harp. In fact, the president hasn't worn a toga since his senior year in college," said Perino.
Asked why it took more than 18 months for the Administration to react to the cover, Perino said that "no one in the Administration had a subscription to the magazine," and that she did not become aware of its existence until an Omaha, Nebraska, Republican "saw it in the waiting room of her doctor's office, and immediately notified us. When I spoke to her this morning, she was in tears," reported Perino..."
If you're a little rough on your Roman history, Nero is the one pegged as the arsonist in the Great Fire of Rome by Suetonius and Tacitus, even though he blamed it on the Christians.
Another artist drew a mock-up of what it might look like if the New Yorker had a cover about the worst rumours about McCain, which I asked Matt Welch about when he was on Political Animals on the WS Radio Network. Apparently, those rumours aren't true.
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 17, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
US Ambassador to Canada: Canada has proven to be our "friend in need"
Ambassador David Wilkins answered the questions on US-Canada bilateral relations and this is what he said about this great country:
The United States and Canada have been fast friends and neighbors for generations. We share a long-standing peace and the greatest trade relationship that has ever existed in the history of the world. Canada has proven its friendship on countless occasions -- notably by coming to our aid whenever the U.S. has needed help. From harboring stranded U.S. citizens after the attacks of September 11, 2001 to reaching out immediately with assistance and support to the victims of Hurricane Katrina, Canada has proven to be our "friend in need."
Posted by Winston on July 17, 2008 in International Affairs | Permalink | Comments (15) | TrackBack
Al & Mike Show Episode 32 - Ezra Update
Ezra Levant (http://www.ezralevant.com) updates us on the freespeech war. Jay Currie (http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com) joins us as well. We talk about Warren Kinsella's lawsuit, Omar Khadr, and more.
Listen Now
Subscribe to RSS: Click here for podcast RSS feed.
Subscribe in iTunes for your iPod: Click here (Must have iTunes installed)
Posted by Mike Brock on July 17, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Al & Mike Show Episode 32 - LIVE
Live: 8:00PM EST / 5:00PM PST Webcast powered by Ustream.TVPosted by Mike Brock on July 17, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
I guess this now means the evidence is 'controvertible'
The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming "incontrovertible."
Hat-tip to Drudge
Posted by Terry O'Neill on July 17, 2008 in Science | Permalink | Comments (17) | TrackBack
Think of the children, dismantle the schools
I did enough (but thankfully not all) of my "schooling" in BC, following government-mandated curricula, to know that public education is at the heart of the whole statist enterprise. Locking up impressionable minds for a decade (a dozen years in NB and ON) of pro-state indoctrination is the most effective means that the government has of preventing Canadians from asking difficult questions or launching effective challenges to the powers-that-be. If I could snap my fingers (or "push the button") and make any government program disappear, it wouldn't be the HRCs, the income tax, drug prohibition, the Bank of Canada, or anything else, it would be public education.
Instead of having the government spend 7% of GDP on education, and forcing the provinces (except Quebec) to implement the convoluted Section 23 provisions, what if we chose competition and diversity instead of monopoly and conformity?
What if we left the resolution of controversial questions about what students should learn about religion, evolution and sex, how to deal with inadequate or batty teachers, and what students can wear up to the real customers of a school, the parents and their children, instead of teachers unions, school boards, courts, and legislators?
In the 1990s, Alberta took the first baby steps towards restructuring the education system, Premier Ralph Klein and education Minister Halvar Johnson cut the budget for the Department of Education, provided for more parental choice, and allowed for the establishment of public Charter schools which could bypass some of the strictures of the local school districts and introduce some diversity in education methods, but much more radical measures must be taken if we ever want to stop undereducating our children.
(HT: Gerry)
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 17, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack
Shame on the YWCA
Anyone know how long it's been since YWCA Canada ceased to refer to itself by its full, historic name? The "Our History in Canada" page on its website makes absolutely no reference to the organization ever having been called anything but the YWCA–modern feminists obviously not wanting anything whatsoever to do with the word "Christian."
I raise this issue now in response to the sad news, which appeared in my inbox today, that YWCA Canada has announced its support of Henry Morgentaler's appointment to the Order of Canada. I can't help but think that the Y's taking of this position is a gross insult to the memory of the remarkable Christian women who founded the YWCA more than a century ago. A sad day, indeed.
Posted by Terry O'Neill on July 17, 2008 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (22) | TrackBack
Fasting for Darfur and the just-in-time-for-summer Morgentaler Diet
Got a political cause? Show your support by fasting and watch the pounds melt away faster than ice-cream in a Darfur refugee camp.
That's what Alberta MLA David Swann did last year. In late November he announced to the world that he would fast over the week of December 3rd to show his support for the 2.5 million refugees still living in camps in Darfur. It was a smart move for a weight-watching politico heading into the calorie-rich holiday season.
With Christmas long past and the unforgiving bathing suit season upon us, dieters are even more determined to shed a few pounds. Well there’s good news: the Morgentaler Diet.
Stephanie Gray with the Calgary-based Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR) is asking Canadians to join her on a fast to help save the soul of abortion rights advocate, and newest member of the Order of Canada, Dr. Henry Morgentaler.
In an email to supporters, Gray wrote:
“Can you imagine, then, how beautiful it would be if he became pro-life? Can you imagine if he converted? Can you imagine if he had a Saul to Paul-type transformation? What if the people who gave him the award for his deeds of killing babies, had to watch him reject the award on the day of delivery because he regretted and repented, with his whole heart and soul, all that he had done?”
She also wrote that...
“As the scriptures reveal, fasting is an important spiritual tool used by, to name a few, Esther, Daniel, David, Paul & Barnabas, and Jesus.”
The fast will start tomorrow (Friday, July 18).
Posted by Matthew Johnston on July 17, 2008 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Feminists in favo[u]r of employment discrimination
Pro-choice lobbying group NARAL and Ann at feministing.com (language warning) are up in arms about a Presidential proposal that would require recipients of aid from federal health programs to certify that "they will not refuse to hire nurses and other providers who object to abortion and even certain types of birth control."
From the New York Times:
Under the draft of a proposed rule, hospitals, clinics, researchers and medical schools would have to sign “written certifications” as a prerequisite to getting money under any program run by the Department of Health and Human Services.
...
The new requirement is needed to ensure that federal money does not
“support morally coercive or discriminatory practices or policies in
violation of federal law.”
...
The administration says it could cut off federal aid to individuals or
entities that discriminate against people who object to abortion on the
basis of “religious beliefs or moral convictions.”
This proposal is interesting in light of Pierre Lemieux's recent column on moral neutrality. One might argue that prohibiting recipients of federal aid from discriminating against people on the basis of their religious beliefs is just another exercise in moral neutrality.
For example, liberals have objected to the government funding faith-based programs when the recipients of those funds discriminate against gay people. Why should programs that discriminate against Christians and other religious believers get a free pass?
Posted by Terrence Watson on July 17, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack
I doubt I'll generate the same interest today . . .
. . . but there are some new calls for boycotting the 2008 Olympics.
Posted by D.J. McGuire on July 17, 2008 in International Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
China to become even less endearing
Nothing like a language ban to make a good impression on the rest of the free world!
Posted by Meredith Lilly on July 17, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Making Polar Bears Cry
Feeling a little green fatigued, I decided someone had to take a stand against nagging environmentalists and politicians.
So I did, with this column which appears in today's Sun Media chain.
Posted by Gerry Nicholls on July 17, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Richard Dawkins is smarter than you
Mark Shea at Catholic Exchange tells the lurid tale of how Richard Dawkins, biologist and atheist extraordinaire just doesn't seem to understand when he's being lampooned.
At issue is the video embedded below, entitled "Beware the Believers." If you hate rap or have a problem with semi-bad language, don't watch it. At the same time, I don't even like rap much at all and found the video a catchy, but fairly obvious satirical send up of Richard Dawkins and his legion of atheist elites (such as self-identified "Brights".)
At least, I found it an obvious send up. Can anyone watch this video and NOT see that it's making fun of Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Christopher Hitchens, and other anti-theists? Referring to Dawkins, the chorus contains the lines:
Yeah he's the Dick to the Doc to the phd,
he's smarter than you he's got a science degree!
The Dick to the Doc to the phd,
he's still smarter than you he studied biology!
And, at one point, this rather clever snipe at Dawkins' sometimes angry feelings about the Deity:
hell if I was dyslexic I'd even hate "dog" too.
You can read the lyrics here. Anyway, as Shea relates, the video was rather confusing to Dawkins, who posted it on his blog, along with this: If anyone can understand a single word of this, don’t bother to translate, just tell me whose side it’s on
Yep. That's Dawkins: quick, somebody tell him whose side this video is on! Shea tells the whole story and I won't steal his thunder. Suffice to say, after three and half days, Dawkins finally got around to figuring out what the hell was going on in the video, and decided he didn't like it.
I still think it's pretty hilarious. But then, I'm not as smart as Richard Dawkins.
H/T: Five Feet of Fury
Posted by Terrence Watson on July 16, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBack
Grant Brown: Women are always victims, even when they're not
Western Standard columnist Grant Brown is a stickler when it comes to impartiality and equal treatment before the law. This week, in "Women are always victims, even when they're not," Brown explores the double standards that came into play in the investigation of a murder-suicide by London Police Service Inspector Kelly Johnson. An excerpt:
"The report notes that the vast preponderance of murder-suicides is perpetrated by men in the context of a separation. Given the “markers” listed by the authors in the case of Kelly Johnson, it should be easy even for Faulkner to see why. Most men who are involuntarily separated from their partners suffer from most of the stressors she faced, and many more significant ones, besides. In addition to the personal rejection, sometimes by a very long-term partner, men also have to deal with being forcibly ejected from their own homes and the consequent loss of contact with their children, the automatic confiscation of a large chunk of their incomes, and sometimes the indignity of an investigation into false allegations of abuse or (worse) child sexual abuse.
In my family-law practice, I saw many male clients who were in far more dire circumstances than Johnson was facing. I was frequently amazed at the resilience and stoicism men show in the face of the unbearable expectations and outrageous injustices that are heaped upon them. Ironically, one stressor the authors specifically note is that Johnson was a woman in a demanding, male-dominated occupation. But the risks and stresses associated with male-dominated occupations affect men just as much as women. The surprising thing isn’t that most murder-suicides are perpetrated by men in the context of a separation; the surprising thing is that even more men do not snap under the burdens placed upon them by social expectations and our adversarial, mother-friendly family courts."
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 16, 2008 in Western Standard | Permalink | Comments (32) | TrackBack
Moin Yahya: Why Conservatives and Liberals are both wrong
Sometimes, I make a slippery slope argument for libertarianism.
It goes like this: Suppose you really want policy x. Policy x can be anything at all--it can be provision of welfare, or warfare against some country. But suppose you really don't want some policy, policy y. Policy y can be anything at all--it can be warfare or welfare or whatever or fish sticks or a mission to Mars.
In order to get x through the government, you need to empower it. You need to give it the authority to collect the revenue for x, and you need to give it the authority to make x a success.
Now couple this point about authority with a few reasonable assumptions about the sorts of incentives that government actors are faced with--a) seek more power, b) get more money, c) get more authority over more stuff.
And you get something like this: To empower the government to act on x, you will increase the probability of the government also doing y. The more willing you are to empower the government to get x, the more likely it will be to also do y.
Given the spillover effects, is it worth it? Or are we better off trying our level best to do x privately, even if it won't have the kind of resources the government could muster, in order to avoid y?
It's at least suggestive. And it's the point of Moin Yahya's guest column entitled, aptly enough, "Why Conservatives and Liberals are both wrong." A juicy excerpt:
"...once Leviathan is created for one end, it is very easy for the beast to continue its quest to dominate all ends of our lives. The mistake both sides of the political spectrum make is assuming that somehow the machinery of oppression will only control those aspects of our lives they they expressly voted for it to interfere in." (Ed's note: Yup.)
Moin Yahya will be speaking on just this topic at this year's Liberty Summer Seminar, by the way. If you want to chat with him about this, or anything else, for that matter, you can register for the Seminar here. It's in Orono, Ontario, and will take place over the July 26, 27 weekend.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on July 16, 2008 in Western Standard | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack
A stopped clock tells the right time twice a day
McCain's best buddy Joe Lieberman is right on something for once: the 1st Amendment. Lieberman co-sponsored the Senate version of the Free Speech Protection Act of 2008, which would protect American residents from foreign libel judgments. This will make it harder to engage in "libel tourism," a method favoured by radical Islamists to silence their critics. From the Daily Bayonet:
"United States Senators Arlen Specter and Joe Lieberman wrote an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal yesterday that points out the danger of having foreign jurisdictions attempt to chill or limit free speech in America.
The bi-partisan senators are speaking in support of a new bill that will prevent US Courts from enforcing foreign court rulings in the USA.
Put this strong position together with Ezra Levant's invitation to speak in front of a US Congressional caucus on human rights last week and you can see that politicians from all parties south of our border take protection of individual liberties very seriously.
What a pity then that our Canada's senior politicians seem so intent on avoiding the issue."
I'm not so confident that "politicians from all parties" in the US "take protection of individual liberties very seriously." Among the multitude of abuses against the Bill of Rights, the McCain-Feingold bill has already severely crippled political speech in the United States. For now however, having our Constitution "guarantee the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society," means that free expression is in shoddy shape right now in Canada and we need to be much more vigilant in defending against abuses of our speech rights than those in the US. Nonetheless, it's nice to see that Ezra Levant, still bearing battle scars from his skirmishes with the AHRC, is championing freedom of speech for all.
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 16, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Oh, those crazy college pranksters!
This is horrible, but it still made me laugh.
Jackson State University (in Mississippi) bought a plot of land adjacent to the home of Annie Wilson. Apparently, the university was going to clear the land and use it for an expansion.
Then the pranksters came -- or at least, that's where university officials are placing the blame. The pranksters switched the address of Ms. Wilson's home with that of the adjacent lot and also moved a notice on the latter lot indicating the university's ownership onto her own.
You can imagine the pranksters carrying around a clipboard:
1. Address switched -- check!
2. Ownership noticed moved -- check!
3. ???
4. Profit!
Anyway, contractors fell for the trick and knocked down Ms. Wilson's house.
From the picture on the right, it looks more like they just crushed the front of it. I wonder if she was home at the time?
(Stop laughing, you evil, evil man!)
Hopefully, Ms. Wilson will now sue everybody.
H/T: Kip's blog. Kip's post on this story includes an interesting suggestion that tort law, not constitutional or criminal law, is the "real law of libertarianism."
Posted by Terrence Watson on July 16, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
I've seen this movie before, and I don't like the ending
The more I look at the pages of this blog, the more concerned I get.
I can understand the desire to support limited government folks like Dr. Paul, particularly when they seem so few and far between, but I must confess, I'm starting to see the same ailment that felled Paul's campaign and nearly every other limited-government effort: the foreign policy syndrome.
Far too many libertarians seem to be convinced that limited government at home must mean a weak nation abroad. The high irony is that the only people in the history of the world to make libertarianism a major and sustainable political force (Jefferson, Madison, and perhaps Andrew Jackson) all supported robust foreign policies (in fact the latter two were preceived as bloodthirsty war-mongers in their day).
Jefferson at first tried the way most libertarians would prefer; he ended up with an undeclared war against the Barbary Pirates and a disastrous trade embargo that crippled the American economy. Madison dropped the embargo, but his attempts to avoid war only invited it in 1812. Jackson himself was a hero of that war, and his pre-Presidential career involved so many battles he was labeled a dangerous war-monger by nearly everyone in Washington before he took office. His political heirs - all of who claimed Jefferson as their model - seized half of Mexico by military force (it is now know as Texas, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, and California).
What these folks learned is that America has enemies, enemies who are determined to take her down and wipe her out no matter what we tell them. The War of 1812 from Canada's perspective was a repulsion of an American invasion that made no sense, but down here, it was a reaction provoked by a reckless British government which was hoping to carve out large chunks of the United States for the purposes of a Native American/First Nation buffer state (I will admit to being far less proud of the Mexican war).
Libertarians are wise to warn us of how war enlarges state power, but they themselves must realize that the weakness they propose in foreign policy often leads to those very wars. Otherwise, they fall into the Carteresque trap of worrying about an "American imperialism" and ignoring a regime that slaughters tens of millions of its own people without a second thought.
Posted by D.J. McGuire on July 16, 2008 in International Affairs, International Politics | Permalink | Comments (17) | TrackBack
Bill Kauffman: Paleo-Jeffersonian
W. James Antle III, associate editor at the American Spectator, reviews Bill Kauffman's new book, Ain't My America: The Long, Noble History of Anti-War Conservatism in the summer issue of Reason. For the unaware, Bill Kauffman is the Sage of Batavia, a localist and one of the most interesting traditional conservative voices today. A tiny excerpt of a long and fascinating exploration:
"Reagan said that his political message could be summed up in “Just five words: family, work, neighborhood, freedom, and peace.” When the right applies these principles more consistently to foreign policy, it will be morning in Bill Kauffman’s America."
Responding to a portion of the review which talked about:
"A conservatism that identifies with McGovern more than Reagan, Gore Vidal more than William F. Buckley Jr., and the New Left more than the religious right probably has no political future. Neither does a Kauffmanesque coalition of libertarians and socialists, segregationists and Black Panthers, hippies and Birchers, however interesting that coalition might be."
Joshua Snyder, the Catholic American expatriate says "future or not, count me in," Snyder isn't alone, the last attempt at an Old Right-New Left coalition came during the Vietnam Conflict, when Murray Rothbard and Karl Hess tried to bridge the gaps, but the anti-imperialists are coming together even now. If you're wondering exactly how interesting this coalition of "reactionary radicals" can look, go no further than the section of Kauffman's book Look Homeward America about the novelist and "militia of love" founder Carolyn Chute after the break.
I've written more about Bill Kauffman and "Little America" here and about the Old Right and the Remnant here.
UPDATE: From Jim Antle's blog: "A blogger at the Western Standard says I'm selling Kauffman's proposed Old Right/New Left political coalition -- reactionary radicals of the left and right -- short ... These movements would have to be much bigger than they were during Vietnam or are now for me to persuaded that I'm misjudging things or perhaps being too conventional in my political thinking. For now, I'll only concede I was somewhat more dour about Ron Paul's impact when I wrote the review than I am now."
If a rat deserts a sinking ship, what do we call those brave souls who climb aboard and start bailing? Carolyn launched the 2nd Maine after the Oklahoma City bombing, when "it started to look bad for militias. I wanted to give them a good name."
...So Carolyn and and an activist from the leftist Labor Party organized the 2nd Maine Militia. Their early meetings were a true rainbow coalition. There were "guys in camo, hippies, bikers, old ladies, Republicans, Democrats, Greens, Marxists, Libertarians, John Birchers. It was so cute!" says Carolyn with delight.
...The 2nd Maine got a bit too big for Carolyn's taste. "My idea was to have it tribal: Different people start their own militias all over the place and then we get together to do a big thing. ... People can develop their own style, their own neighborhood.- Bill Kauffman, Look Homeward America: In Search of Reactionary Radicals and Front-Porch Anarchists.
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 16, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Nassim Nicholas Taleb: Outlier
One of the most interesting contemporary writers on epistemology, randomness, markets, skepticism, and predictions is Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of the bestselling books Fooled By Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the Markets and The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable.
He was profiled in The Sunday Times and gave his top ten life tips:
1 - Scepticism is effortful and costly. It is better to be sceptical about matters of large consequences, and be imperfect, foolish and human in the small and the aesthetic.
2 - Go to parties. You can’t even start to know what you may find on the envelope of serendipity. If you suffer from agoraphobia, send colleagues.
3 - It’s not a good idea to take a forecast from someone wearing a tie. If possible, tease people who take themselves and their knowledge too seriously.
4 - Wear your best for your execution and stand dignified. Your last recourse against randomness is how you act — if you can’t control outcomes, you can control the elegance of your behaviour. You will always have the last word.
5 - Don’t disturb complicated systems that have been around for a very long time. We don’t understand their logic. Don’t pollute the planet. Leave it the way we found it, regardless of scientific ‘evidence’.
6 - Learn to fail with pride — and do so fast and cleanly. Maximise trial and error — by mastering the error part.
7 - Avoid losers. If you hear someone use the words ‘impossible’, ‘never’, ‘too difficult’ too often, drop him or her from your social network. Never take ‘no’ for an answer (conversely, take most ‘yeses’ as ‘most probably’).
8 - Don’t read newspapers for the news (just for the gossip and, of course, profiles of authors). The best filter to know if the news matters is if you hear it in cafes, restaurants... or (again) parties.
9 - Hard work will get you a professorship or a BMW. You need both work and luck for a Booker, a Nobel or a private jet.
10 - Answer e-mails from junior people before more senior ones. Junior people have further to go and tend to remember who slighted them.
If you're up for an engaging and interesting listen, check out this EconLog podcast interview of Taleb by George Mason University Professor of Economics Russ Roberts.
Taleb, a Levantine Greek Orthodox Christian, on religion after the break.
(H/T Jason)
'So, you are wondering, who is this guy? He was born in 1960 in Lebanon, though he casts doubt on both these “facts”. The year is “close enough” – he doesn’t like to give out his birth date because of identity theft and he doesn’t believe in national character. He has, however, a regional identity; he calls himself a Levantine, a member of the indecipherably complex eastern Mediterranean civilisation. “My body and soul are Mediterranean.”
Both maternal and paternal antecedents are grand, privileged and politically prominent. They are also Christian – Greek Orthodox. Startlingly, this great sceptic, this non-guru who believes in nothing, is still a practising Christian. He regards with some contempt the militant atheism movement led by Richard Dawkins.
“Scientists don’t know what they are talking about when they talk about religion. Religion has nothing to do with belief, and I don’t believe it has any negative impact on people’s lives outside of intolerance. Why do I go to church? It’s like asking, why did you marry that woman? You make up reasons, but it’s probably just smell. I love the smell of candles. It’s an aesthetic thing.”
Take away religion, he says, and people start believing in nationalism, which has killed far more people. Religion is also a good way of handling uncertainty. It lowers blood pressure. He’s convinced that religious people take fewer financial risks.'
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 16, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Happy Birthday Ted!
Alberta's greatest living conservative–and my friend–Ted Byfield, turned 80 last week. As most of those reading this blog will know, Ted was the founder of the newsmagazine Alberta Report, which for 30 years was the only conservative magazine in Canada, and was the inspiration for its woefully short-lived successor, the Western Standard. Ted has by no means settled into graceful retirement. He's busily working on the 12-volume history of Christianity, The Christians, whose seventh volume I recently helped him complete. I would urge anyone interested in the single greatest shaping force of western civilization, and in helping Ted fulfil his final dream, to buy this very readable book. You can get the details at www.christianhistoryproject.com. Those who want to wish Ted a belated happy birthday or contribute financially to his project (a couple of hundred thousand would come in handy just about now) can email him at tedbyfield AT shaw DOT ca. His son Link and daughter-in-law Joanne threw a nice party for him at their acreage north of Edmonton. If you want to hear about the party, along with a couple of Ted Byfield anecdotes, you're welcome to visit my blog at ricdolphin.com.
Posted by Ric Dolphin on July 15, 2008 in Canadian Conservative Politics | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Re: The cover of the latest New Yorker...
Terrence, Obama commented directly on the cartoon on the cover of the New Yorker, he said it's "just a cartoon" and is protected by the 1st Amendment, but that it was an "insult to Muslim-Americans."
I sometimes forget that Obama is an expert politician, look how he manages to get so much of his message out in a short interview, of course Larry King is a soft-ball interviewer, but Barry is smoooth.
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 15, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Paul Broun heads back to Washington
One of the most pro-liberty Congressmen in the U.S. House of Representatives, Paul Broun (R-GA) beat a well-funded challenger. Here's what Dave Weigel wrote in a profile about "The Accidental Congressman":
'There are two reasons why Broun’s career is worth examining closely. The first is Broun himself. He compares himself happily to Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), the anti-war libertarian presidential candidate: Both men are physicians who carry pocket Constitutions and often find themselves on the losing side of congressional votes. (Broun likes Paul, but he doesn’t share Paul’s views on Iraq and won’t make a presidential endorsement.) The day he was sworn in, Broun joined just 13 other Republicans (and 150 Democrats) in supporting a bill to call off raids by the Drug Enforcement Administration on medical marijuana distributors. He was one of only four congressmen to oppose the Drug Endangered Children Act, which allocated $20 million to take care of children living among drugs and drug dealers, and one of three to vote against establishing a new registry to keep track of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (“Lou Gehrig’s disease”).
Asked about both votes, Broun hauls out his Constitution and flips it open to Article I, Section 8. “We don’t have authority to create things like that,” he says. “This lists the functions of the federal government, and it’s about a page and a half long. I’d say most of the things this Congress does, we don’t actually have the authority to do.”
What a radical concept! This means that Ron Paul will be voting "No" alone a little less often.
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 15, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBack
Mine Your Own Business trailer
This is the trailer for Mine Your Own Business which will be the feature film (11:15 a.m.–July 27) at the Liberty Summer Seminar in Orono, Ontario just 45 minutes east of Toronto. Register now.
What if everything you thought about the environmental movement was wrong?
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 15, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Global Warming on "Just Right" with Paul McKeever and Bob Metz
You brought up global warming, Kalim, so I can't help myself. Since I'm busy scouring the web and other places for high-quality, pro-liberty, pro-property, pro-family radio shows that can be podcast, I got an email from Paul McKeever, leader of the Freedom Party of Ontario. He was on "Just Right," a radio show broadcast by the University of Western Ontario's radio station, and hosted by Robert Metz, and sent me a link to that chit-chat about all the warmings. That is happening. In the world. And we're doomed.
Where was I? Oh yeah: I sent along word to Bob that we'd like to have his show as part of the WS Radio network. We'll see if he's interested. (Incidentally, dear reader, if you know of any good podcasts or radio shows that you think we should pursue for WS Radio, do let us know. We're looking.)
Here's part one of the YouTube, and a link to part two:
And here's the link to part two.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on July 15, 2008 in Canadian Politics | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Doubt the global warming religion
At a recent address to the Petroleum Club in Calgary, Lawrence Solomon, Executive Director of Energy Probe International, the Urban Renaissance Institute and author of The Deniers: The world-renowned scientists who stood up against global warming hysteria, political persecution, and fraud took the gathered oil and gas executives to task:
"Instead of making your case to the public, instead of defending yourselves and your industry, you’ve thrown in the towel, or tried to be greener than green, hoping to avoid recrimination... Your present strategy of lying low and hoping all this will pass has gotten you nowhere. You need to make your case, factually and frankly. The public will be skeptical of your arguments, as it should be. But if your critics can’t counter your factual arguments, it is your critics who will fail."
He's right, by acceding to all the claims of their environmentalist critics, the oil companies place themselves in a position of moral inferiority (no one is buying your green campaign BP), many of them probably think of themselves as morally inferior, and experience the guilt and shame that goes along with that. Need I remind the sane readers that oil is what meets the demand for most of the energy in our high-energy-use society, without it we would not enjoy the high standard of living and unprecedented prosperity with which we live. The oil industry is of course far from faultless, but to target them (and ourselves) with increased taxes or regulation is lunatic. Government can hardly keep illegal drugs off the street, now we expect them to control the weather?
There are all sorts of cheaper and cleaner sources of energy compared to burning fossil fuels, but if we want to start moving faster to alternative energy sources, we need to clear the market of regulations, distorting subsidies, mercantilism, government ownership/monopoly, and other interventions which hold back entrepreneurship and innovation.
There is no climate change "consensus"; the case for human-caused global warming is not only debatable, but also also based on questionable assumptions.
Because of the widespread acceptance of the totalitarian policies necessary to "end climate change," in the hands of the watermelon environmentalists, global warming may be the biggest threat to human freedom since Leninism; it must be discussed and debated.
In most of Canadian society, however, this sort of talk is completely taboo. Just question global warming and you will likely be branded a "denier," a miserable term intended to evoke association with those contemptible individuals who deny the Jewish Holocaust. Many climate scientists who have problems with the case for anthropogenic global warming have gone on the offensive. Lay-skeptics should do the same. Imagine...
(HT: Lew)
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 15, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (59) | TrackBack
Well-read janitor gets apology
I can't remember if this story was covered on the Shotgun when it first came up, but I know we discussed it on Political Animals well before the Wall Street Journal did (maybe they're listening to our podcasts?)
A janitor at University-Purdue University at Indianapolis was reading a book entitled "Notre Dame vs. the Klan: How The Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan." From what I gather, the book is about how Notre Dame students smacked some Klan members around in 1924 (and good for them, too.) Anyway, not a very pro-Klan book.
Keith John Sampson, the janitor, happened to be reading the book during a break.
From MSNBC:
Sampson says his union official likened the book to bringing pornography to work, and the school's affirmative action officer in November told Sampson his conduct constituted racial harassment.
"You used extremely poor judgment by insisting on openly reading the book related to a historically and racially abhorrent subject in the presence of your black co-workers," Lillian Charleston wrote in a letter to Sampson.
Initially, the university's affirmative action office accused Sampson of "racial harassment." Long story short, the university was going to let Sampson get lynched (figuratively) until he contacted the American Civil Liberties Union. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) got involved as well. Once Political Animals reported on the story, there was no doubt the university was going to soon cave in and apologize.
Which they did, this past Friday. On Friday, Charles Bantz, the university chancellor, sent a letter of apology to Sampson. Meanwhile, FIRE is not satisfied. As the WSJ article indicates, it turns out that when the affirmative action office's conclusions were first challenged, they backtracked. Sort of.
The racial harassment complaint against Sampson wasn't about the book he was reading, Lillian Charleston, chief affirmative action officer, claimed. Rather, it was about other, never specified "harassing behavior" he'd engaged in. In other words, when asked to substantiate the complaint against Sampson, Ms. Charleston basically insinuated that he was a racist. Good job, Ms. Chief Affirmative Action (hopefully, not for much longer.)
Since the university has yet to apologize for its smear campaign against Sampson, FIRE is not happy. FIRE does good work in the world;, and they're an organization whose efforts we should all support.
Posted by Terrence Watson on July 15, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack
A step toward accountability in First Nations communities
In his recent column on First Nations, Colin Craig, Manitoba director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, argues that...
One reason for a lack of accountability on reserves is the fact that up until now, no one (even the department of Indian and Northern Affairs) could audit individual reserves and track how funds were being spent. Yes, over the last 141 years, the federal government has been unable to ensure that the hundreds of billions of tax dollars it has transferred to First Nations communities are used for their intended programs and services.
To address this problem, the CTF has been calling for audits of reserve spending for years. Thankfully, the federal government has finally listened. As of July 1st, Ottawa will now be able to audit the spending activities of first nation communities. This will bring them inline with other agencies that receive funding from the government.
Keeping reading “A step toward accountability” here.
Posted by Matthew Johnston on July 15, 2008 in Aboriginal Issues | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Olympic checklist
Silence occupied Tibet - check
Keep dissidents out of Beijing - check
Ensure glowing coverage from the rest of the world - Have to keep an eye on that Sudan thing
Make sure outside broadcasting gets blocked - check
Posted by D.J. McGuire on July 15, 2008 in International Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Marc Emery: Scary Times
On Thursday, July 10, Vancouver police visited Marc Emery's place at 1350 Commercial Drive where he was planning to put in a new store. According to Emery, they picked up the phone and gave the landlord a buzz, telling the landlord that Emery wasn't going to get a business license, that he sold drugs, and that Emery had an advertisement in the window saying that marijuana is for sale inside. Within 24 hours, Emery's landlord terminated his lease.
This latest bump-in with the law has motivated Emery to pen a lengthy column for our readers at the Western Standard entitled "Risky Times." Not one to shy away from a battle, Emery skewers the Vancouver Police Department and various government agencies both here and in the U.S. for their sometimes-aggressive, and always liberticidal measures against the marijuana community.
"I am Goldstein from George Orwell’s 1984," writes Emery. "The drug war is perpetual war, and I am the mythical rebel recast as all-powerful drug lord that is poisoning the will of the nation, and of course, its children. Meanwhile the state runs amok passing new laws, regulations, requirements that make ordinary life a risky gamble with the prospect of jail, punishment, asset forfeiture, tasering, or any manner of police arrogance or brutality."
It's interesting, as Marc points out, that Vancouver is consistently ranked in the top-ten of best places in the world to live considering the generally laissez-faire attitude authorities tend to take. Marc argues that it is precisely because the authorities are so live-and-let-live that Vancouver, or "Vansterdam"--a play on Vancouver's association with Amsterdam--as many call it, is so highly regarded. A tolerant (and permissive?) culture, he says, is part-and-parcel of Vancouver's appeal, and the reason why Vancouverites are so happy with their city.
Of course, we can debate this.
One way to see if this generalization bears out is to compare all of the cities in the top ten, or to look at, for instance, the U.S. and the rankings of cities there. I don't know much about Plymouth, MN, or Fort Collins, CO, or Naperville, IL, (the top three cities) but their demographic and population details give me the impression that they are probably family-oriented, old-fashioned, small-town sorts of places. San Francisco, a city that screams "Vancouver of the South," doesn't even crack the top 100. Meanwhile, Zurich, Vienna, Geneva, and Auckland (numbers one through five, with Vancouver placing fourth this year) are difficult to rank on a "live-and-let-live" scale (Amsterdam is not on the top-ten list, which would have at least given strong confirmation of the claim).
Still, there's something special about Vancouver. And no one can deny the significance of the marijuana community in that city. As well, no one can deny that Marc Emery really is the fountainhead of that community. To get his take on his treatment at the hands of the various police and government agencies, and why he thinks we live in "scary times," you'll have to read his whole piece.
Emery's extradition hearing, meanwhile, is scheduled for February 9 to the 17th in B.C.'s Supreme Court. It will be interesting to see what the government of Canada decides to do in his case, and we'll be covering it from beginning to end.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on July 15, 2008 in Western Standard | Permalink | Comments (263) | TrackBack
The Omar Khadr interrogation video
Omar Khadr, the Canadian teenager accused of being a terrorist, was interrogated at Guantanamo Bay. Now lawyers for Khadr have released an edited portion of the video of that interrogation, which you can watch via Globe and Mail, and the Toronto Star (EDIT: Or just scroll down for the YouTube). The full seven-hour video of the interrogation will be available later today.
From The Star:
"As the Canadians leave the room, Khadr is seen holding his head, rocking back and forth, sobbing and repeating one phrase over and over. The quality of the audio recording makes it difficult to determine what he is saying, but it sounds like "help me" or "kill me."
Meanwhile, Stephen Harper, speaking in Tokyo, Japan, spoke glowingly about a global warming break-through and distanced himself from claims that Canadian officials knew that Khadr was harshly treated in response to a question from a reporter.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on July 15, 2008 in International Affairs | Permalink | Comments (44) | TrackBack
Comics for Freedom Rally
You may have heard of Toronto-based comic Guy Earle. His response to a lesbian heckler was deemed so unfunny as to be possibly sufficiently offensive to warrant a Human Rights Tribunal hearing in British Columbia.
A comedian. On trial. In Canada. I'm not making this up.
Of course, Ezra Levant is all over this. He's been busy shining a light on the dark underbelly of Canada's Human Rights Tribunals/Commission/Inquisition/Debacle. And Guy Earle sounds like a guy who won't take this lying down. The Toronto comedy scene appears to be lining up to support Earle, and you can too. If you're going to be in Toronto this weekend, go drop $20 and get a good laugh at the government's expense by attending the Comics for Freedom rally:
Here's Guy explaining his predicament, the situation, and why he's being taken before a Human Rights Tribunal (not safe for work, crass, and definitely "not funny" according to our bureaucrat humour police):
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on July 15, 2008 in Canadian Politics | Permalink | Comments (36) | TrackBack
McCain the pinko Republican
The Southern Avenger reminds us that McCain is no different from Obama.
UPDATE: Here's Sheldon Richman, editor of The Freeman and author of Tethered Citizens: Time to Repeal the Welfare State, on GOP statists and economic ignorance.
"Any remaining pretense that the Republican Party is the party of free markets has been blown to smithereens in the election season. Even the lip service to free enterprise has become scarce, as the major candidates threw their arms around flagrantly statist economic proposals."
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 15, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Anarcho-dandyism
Every year since 2004, Chap Magazine has held the Chap Olympics, this year it was on on July 12th. Chap Magazine
"...proposes to take a stand against this culture of vulgarity. We must show our children that the things worth fighting for are not the latest plastic plimsolls but a shiny pair of brogues. We must wean them off their alcopops and teach them how to mix martinis. Let the young not be ashamed of their flabby paunches, which they try to hide in their nylon tracksuits - we shall show them how a well-tailored suit can disguise the most ruined of bodies. Finally, let us capitalise on youth's love of peculiar argot only replace their pidgin ghetto-speak with fruity bons mots and dry witticisms."
These guys are on the front lines against a cultural obsession with outlawing smoking. It's an event for the sort of chap who voted for Boris and reads Taki's High Life column in The Spectator. Matthew, you've got to appreciate the tweed, bowlers, pipe smoking, and the bonny lasses in attendance. I'm expecting all this and more (including the pipe relay) at another celebration of liberty, the LSS on July 26-27th in Orono, Ontario just 45 minutes east of Toronto. I'll bring the gin. Register now.
This video is from 2007:
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 15, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Monday, July 14, 2008
Magicians against utilitarianism
Penn Jillette, the bigger, louder, and cuddlier half of the skeptical libertarian magic duo Penn & Teller had an interesting reaction to some of the discussion following the DC vs. Heller decision.
In a recent post here at the Shotgun, Jaws talked about "the Reason/Cato/Penn & Teller kind of libertarians," that's a good grouping, not only because Penn and Teller are H.L. Mencken research fellows at the Cato Institute, but also because they, unlike many other libertarians, all generally share culturally liberal values (pro-gay, irreligious etc.). However, this video highlights a difference between Jillette's approach to libertarianism and the Cato approach.
Jaws explained that "Cato is interested in practical issues, and produces policy papers that are eminently practical, even if not always persuasive to the beltway crowd. Their approach is utilitarian: Defend individual liberty on the grounds that it is best for most, and try to prove this with inferences from the best available data." Penn says: "live free or die!"
Freedom lovers, science enthusiasts, and critical thinkers will be pleased to hear that Penn & Teller's TV series "Bullshit!" has entered its 6th season, making it the longest running program on the network. Episodes this season have called bullshit on the war on porn, new age medicine, NASA, and goofy beliefs about dolphins. You can catch the rest of the season on Showtime Thursday Friday nights at 10pm EST. Upcoming episodes will demolish and debunk conventional wisdom about the green movement and sensitivity training.
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 14, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Institutional child care needs more critics
It’s hard to find a literary account of a dystopian society that doesn’t include some form of institutional child care.
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, human beings are born artificially in Hatcheries and Conditioning Centres and family life is unknown.
In Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, women of child-bearing age are forced to work as Handmaids, bearing children they will never raise.
In Ayn Rand’s Anthem, children are conceived in Controlled Palaces of Mating and raised by the state in the Home of the Infants.
In George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, family life is controlled and poisoned with suspicion and fear as children are encouraged to denounce their parents for real and imagined Thought Crimes.
These novels are part of popular culture and have played a role in cultivating civil libertarian ideas, especially among young people.
Sadly, however, those civil libertarians who are normally quick to decry authoritarianism (Alberta’s Mental Health Act? Bill C-10?) are silent on institutional child care, even though the destruction of the traditional family is central to virtually every dystopia found in popular fiction.
Not everyone is silent, however. Maureen Bader with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation has written a good critique of the BC government’s plan to institutionalize daycare. She argues that all-day kindergarten is bad for taxpayers and bad for kids.
Read her column “Institutionalized daycare in the spin cycle” here.
Posted by Matthew Johnston on July 14, 2008 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack
Filibuster: Bucket of Talent
Western Standard resident cartoonist, J.J. McCullough, has another gem:
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on July 14, 2008 in Western Standard | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Iran may target Canadians
National Post newspaper reports that the Iranian medium range missiles could target Canadian troops stationed in Afghanistan.
"The BBC has raised the possibility that Iran may target NATO forces in Afghanistan, which include several thousand Canadian troops stationed in the province of Kandahar, with short-range missiles."
Posted by Winston on July 14, 2008 in Current Affairs, Military | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack
Bob Barr hitting the right notes for the campaign
Bob Barr's message on his appearance on Fox and Friends today was great, he's positioning himself as the anti-status quo candidate.
In what an article in The Hill newspaper is calling an "anti-party year," Barr's approach, running against the Democratic-Republican establishment, has the best chance of attracting disaffected voters of all stripes. Here's what Republican pollster David Hill wrote:
"The persistence of third parties and independent candidacies is also threatening the party franchises. While Ralph Nader, the Green Party, and Bob Barr and the Libertarians are not going to win, they are starting to play a persistent role of spoiler and the anti-major-party mood just makes it simple for them. Barr, like Axelrod, seems to understand that party ties aren’t what they used to be and he’s going to use that skillfully.
He could find an audience. A Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll conducted in June 2006 asked whether it would be a good or bad idea if “a third national political party were formed that would run candidates … (for office) … against the Republican and Democratic candidates.” Fifty percent said it was a good idea and only 37 percent felt it was a bad idea. So that leaves 63 percent open to Barr, Nader, Greens and so forth. If Ross Perot ran today, does anyone doubt what havoc he could create in this environment? “Crazy,” Perot’s favorite motif, wouldn’t be strong enough a description.
It’s always dangerous to signal the death of our two major political parties. Like the alligator and the cockroach, they are likely to survive through the eons, through cataclysms and calamity. But their relevance to voters and candidates seems to be on the wane. Party leaders, even the so-called winners in November, must be cautious about taking too much credit for anything that happens."
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 14, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
BC Event Announcements
August 9th - The West Coast Libertarian Foundation is having its Annual Picnic & BBQ at Walter Block's house in North Vancouver. I attended for the first time last year and had a great time getting to know everyone. For details email Paul Geddes (gedwest AT shaw DOT ca).
September 13th - The Ludwig von Mises Institute presents a Mises Circle Event, Choice in Currency: A Path to Sound Money at the Vancouver Convention Centre with speakers David Gordon, Walter Block, Joseph Salerno and Lew Rockwell. The timing of this gathering is very interesting given Ron Paul's recent injection of the idea of alternative currencies into the public debate through the strong anti-central banking message in his presidential campaign and the ongoing Campaign for Liberty. I've already registered. ($75, student scholarships available)
October 25th - Annual General Meeting of the BC Libertarian Party (membership deadline - two months prior to meeting). For details email info@libertarian.bc.ca.
Posted by Kalim Kassam on July 14, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack
WS Radio: Ross Douthat
Listen live (QuickTime), Mondays, 4 - 6 p.m. EST
"Political Animals"--the flagship radio show of Western Standard radio--is a weekly political talk show on 88.1 WBGUFM hosted by Jay Lafayette, Peter Jaworski, and Terrence Watson.
On today's "Political Animals," Terrence, Jay and I will interview Ross Douthat, co-author of "Grand New Party: How Republicans can win the Working Class and save the American Dream." You can get a good sense of the book by checking out their bloggingheads discussion here.
We'll talk with Ross about his new book, conservatism in general, the challenge of the Libertarian Party, social liberalism and its "inherent" (as they put it) opposition to the values and interests of the working class, and the very meaning of "conservatism."
Political Animals is on every Monday from 4 to 6 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, broadcast out of 88.1 FM in the Bowling Green, Ohio area, and on www.wbgufm.com worldwide. To listen to a direct stream, click here (QuickTime). To participate in the discussion, you can call 
888-7-WBGUFM, or send us an email at politicalanimals-at-wbgufm-dot-com.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on July 14, 2008 in WS Radio | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Lemieux: The Illusion of Moral Neutrality
In this week's column, Pierre Lemieux tackles a subject of great personal interest to me: the notion that, ideally, the state ought to practice "moral neutrality."
Lemieux's claim is that, despite the claims of politicians to the contrary, the state cannot and should not practice moral neutrality. Whenever the state makes policy (say, by forbidding the use of certain drugs), it is imposing a moral vision on the rest of us. In addition, Lemieux argues that the "nationalization of morality" has actually resulted in the crowding out of superior private moral norms. By imposing its morality on us, the state is making some of us more depraved than we otherwise might have been.
You've undoubtedly come across the idea of moral neutrality before. Any time someone says, "You can't legislate morality," they're making the claim that the state shouldn't be in the business of imposing a moral vision on its citizens. This might just be a descriptive claim, akin to Thoreau's admittedly disputable statement that "Law never made men a whit more just." That is, we shouldn't try to legislate morality because we can't legislate morality.
But I think when liberals make this claim, they mean something slightly more embarrassing: that it's morally wrong for the state not to be morally neutral. In fact, as Lemieux would point out, this claim is doubly embarrassing, because the state legislates morality all the time (when it subsidies some consensual activities between adults and discourages other, equally consensual activities, for example.)
Second, it's embarrassing because the claim appears contradictory (I say "appears", because non-neutral arguments can be given in favor of adopting a limited moral neutrality insofar as legislation is concerned.) Why shouldn't a politician impose his vision of what humans ought to do or be on the rest of us? Because it would be unjust for him to do so. But why would it be unjust? Because imposing a moral vision on citizens through the law is inconsistent with a particular view of humans as autonomous beings, one we've inherited from such thinkers as John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant.
But Mill's moral vision of the importance of autonomy is just that -- a moral vision, one that we should reject if there are sufficient arguments against it. But if there are no such arguments, then moral neutrality is a sham, because we would still be imposing what we believe is in fact the best moral vision on society. And if there are good arguments against liberal values like autonomy, and we reject the liberal vision, then we will do so in favor of some other, better morality. Either way, we will not and should not be engaged in the practice of moral neutrality.
Click below for excerpts, or here to read the column.
"So, we are living under a morally neutral state? Try telling this to individuals who are denormalized because they smoke tobacco or are jailed because they consume drugs or provide them to consumers, who have their children seized by the state because they don’t teach them state-approved morals."
"Morality is important in social life because it helps coordinate individual actions. The most successful moral rules develop spontaneously when they are not crowed-out by state morality. In this crowding-out lies the tragedy of galloping state intervention during the 20th century. A lesson must be drawn from the fact that private morality has varied inversely with the power of the state and its imposed morality."
Posted by Terrence Watson on July 14, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Zimbabwe running out of paper
Zimbabwe, which surely must be close to the top on the list of "Worst Countries in the World" these days, is in trouble. The government's economic program has hit a snag.
According to the LA Times, Zimbabwe "is about to run out of the paper to print money on." From what I've read, hyperinflation in the country may be the worst ever recorded, surpassing even post World War I Germany. 50 billion Zimbabwe dollars is worth 1 dollar U.S.
Posted by Terrence Watson on July 14, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack