Year: 2012

Stupid Fundamentalists; Obstinate Ignorance.

Jacques Delacroix Liberty , , , ,

Stupid fundamentalist Protestants in Florida burn a Koran publicly because it’s their constitutional right. Stupid Muslims in New York, who say they are not fundamentalists, insist on their right to build a mosque near Ground Zero because it’s their constitutional right.

It all sounds very malicious and moronic but fair.

Speaking of morons, I catch a bit of the far-left show “Democracy Today” on the radio. Some guy whose name I did not catch sermonizes the West about the lack of clean water access for millions of people in the underdeveloped world. He intones that one week of the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would be enough to provide clean water wells to most of those who lack them.

The speaker does not seem to know the basic facts of life: In places like Afghanistan, in most of the underdeveloped world, if you give the government money to dig wells in the countryside, it ends up in Switzerland or on the French Riviera. The solution, of course is to entrust the money to NGOs (voluntary non-government organizations). Oops, NGO workers are targeted for assassination in places like Afghanistan! The assassins are the very people our military are trying to control. There are very mean people who are mean to their own people. Deuh!

Money is not the issue. If his figures are right (they might be), the costs, technical, constructions cost, of providing clean water to nearly everyone could be covered by voluntary subscription in the US and in a handful of other developed countries in one week. We are not selfish or stingy, you left-lib moron!

I keep wondering how an adult man can have the shamelessness to preach on the radio in full ignorance of such basic facts, of facts everyone can ascertain. Oh, well, the President does it all the time.

Obstinate ignorance and the insanity of the sane: Two topics that interest me endlessly. They tend to merge into each other.

Assorted Links on Mormon Baptisms for the Dead

Brandon Christensen Current Events, Links, Religion , , , , , , , ,

Eugene Volokh, a law professor at UCLA, says “so what?”

Ari Cohen, a Political Scientist professor at the Univ. of Nebraska, says “how offensive!”

Over at the American Conservative, Rod Dreher says “so what?”

I’ve already gone over this myself, and I am sure that many, many other people have as well, but I just don’t see what is so offensive about baptizing dead people via proxy.  Yes, it is a bit condescending, but we are talking about religion here, right?

This seems to me to be a clear case of Leftist intolerance to other religions.  How many Leftists do you see decrying the Obama administration for forcing religious institutions to provide contraceptive care against their wishes?

The Left can often be good at protecting the freedom of religion, but Mormon proxy baptisms and forced payments for contraceptive care are examples where the Left errs.  And badly, too.

Contraception and Perversions: Dr D’s Brutal Reminders

Jacques Delacroix Current Events , , , , , ,

Warning: Some parts of this essay may be considered pornographic. (I sure hope so because I need another source of income.) It is mostly addressed to adult women but you should feel free to read it whatever your sex, or sexual orientation, or sexual orientations. If a young girl happens to read it, I am persuaded that it will do her more good than harm in the long run.

The leftist media have a new battle-horse: Republicans are waging “war on women,” they say. They claim that the Republican Party is using contraception denial to undermine women’s freedom. The other morning, I am laboring on the elliptical at the gym maintaining my three-pack. I am watching MSNBC (no choice, I live in Santa Cruz) when comes on an elegant, attractive Professor of Political Science. I don’t know from what university she is and I don’t care. It’s obvious she was invited because of her telegenic appeal. She is a light-skinned African-American woman, quite pretty, with an extremely neat hairdo of a hundred tight little tails. (What do you call those again?) Perfect!

The telegenic professor asserts calmly that the Republican Party is deliberately trying to limit the progress of women into the professions by denying them contraception.

Got it? “Copulate without protection. Become pregnant. Kiss law school good-bye! One less ho in a position of power or influence!”

I wouldn’t believe this enormous absurdity happened on television if I had not heard it myself. We are all more or less guilty for letting this kind of stuff be said without booing. Yes, I think booing is a moral obligation. Continue reading →

This Is What A Dissident Looks Like

Brandon Christensen Current Events , , , ,

I am anti-war, but I take a great interest in the affairs of other peoples, especially ones who live under dictatorships. I am frequently in touch with many activists around the world and believe wholeheartedly into putting my meager resources to good work when it comes to delegitimizing regimes.

Below is a Facebook message a friend sent to me after I asked him to write for an arts and culture webzine I edit: Continue reading →

Media Idiocy Elsewhere: Some Encouraging Observations

Jacques Delacroix Culture, Current Events , ,

Whenever I despair, or more likely, when I become annoyed, because of the lack of criticality our mass media exhibit, I watch something in French or in Spanish. Then, I come out feeling better about criticality and attentiveness in America. In brief, others routinely do worse.

I have written before about this French documentary series I watch often. It’s called “Thalassa.” It’s about the ocean, in a broad sense, including tropical islands, exotic and ingenuous fishing techniques, and beautiful corners of Europe, even of France, that few know about. Thalassa is served in installments that are two hours long and it’s been on about forty weeks each year since 1975 (1975, not a typo). Both the facts of the long duration of each show and of the long duration of the series itself are evidence of success, I think. I mean success by French television standards. As usual, I want to protect myself against the accusation of taking milk from kindergartners.

Well, the last time, I watched Thalassa, the series,  it included twin reports about China-Taiwan and mainland China, the latter technically know as the People’s Republic of China. To explain the split between the two Chinas, the narrative declared that the Chinese Communists had “won the election” in 1949. Correspondingly, according to Thalassa, the official name of mainland China is “The Popular Republic of China.” Yep, I guess it’s popular enough! If you don’t find it popular and you say so, you end up in jail.

The writer of the narrative and the narrator are both idiots. This could happen here, though I think it’s less likely. What I believe is that a successful, important American television series would be edited by responsible people with an ounce of general knowledge, that it would not be left to children or to high-school dropouts. (Here, I am exercising the benefit of doubt. If one checked the French narrators’ and writers ‘ credentials, it might well turn out that they are all graduates of he best French institutes of higher education.) Continue reading →

Bizarre Love Triangle: Towards a New Internationalism

Brandon Christensen Current Events, Links , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Isolationist screeds in the United States are extremely rare these days, which, in my opinion, makes those who promote this noble doctrine to be individuals of exceptional character.  I am a regular reader of the blog Eunomia (authored by Dr. Daniel Larison), which explicates isolationist critiques of current foreign policy (among other things), and I always enjoy what Dr. Larison has to say.

I also happen to find it rather odd that I am often slandered by my sparring partners on both the Left and the Right as being an isolationist, for one reason or another.  I wouldn’t particularly mind being called such, except for the fact that, for reasons I hope to clarify shortly, my positions are hardly in line with those of the paleoconservative isolationists that I have grown to admire (if not disagree with more often than not).

The libertarian philosophy is one of individualism, internationalism, free trade, and the rule of law.  My sparring partners often accuse of me of being an isolationist because of my opposition to wars and “nation-building” abroad, yet this opposition does not stem from a prejudice of robust international diplomacy.  Rather, the war-weariness of libertarianism stems from the fact that war brings misery for the individual, it shatters international consensuses, it disrupts free trade, and it enables governments to ride roughshod over the rule of law in the name of security and of a centrally-planned war effort. Continue reading →

Links From Around the Consortium

Brandon Christensen Liberty, Links , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jacques Delacroix continues his vendetta against Ron Paul.

Dr. Ninos Malek points out the obvious in regards to guns and public schools

Fred Foldvary has a wonderful piece in the Progress Report on Turkey joining NAFTA

Brian Gothberg (with Gregory Christainsen) writes on property rights and whaling technology

Professor Jeffrey Rogers Hummel on Ben Bernanke versus Milton Friedman (pdf) in the Independent Review

Have a great weekend!

Baptisms for the Dead: So What?

Brandon Christensen Current Events, Links , , , , ,

Earlier today over at Slate.com, a spontaneous debate on the curious Mormon practice of baptizing the dead happened. I actually have a lot of Mormon relatives and both of my parents aaannnd all of my siblings are Mormon too, so I always take an interest when Mormonism pops up in the news. For the record, I am not a Mormon, and even if I tried to convert, I don’t think they would let me!

Anyway, I found the way in which this debate unfolded especially heartening, because instead of bagging on Mormonism, or treating it with disrespect, the contributors actually tried to make an effort to understand why Mormons baptize the dead, and then debate why or why not this practice could be perceived to be offensive to people of other creeds. Here are some of the highlights: Continue reading →

Seeing the Forest for the Trees: Humanitarian War and the Omnipotent Expert

Brandon Christensen Current Events, History, Links , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I have made an effort in my blogging escapades to continually point out the underlying reasons for military intervention in poorer (often former colonial) states. Two things that have stood out to me are (1) the condescending display of arrogance on the part of the interventionist in regards to both differing arguments and the people involved in a conflict and (2) the high levels of confidence that these advocates have in their ability to predict the future based, presumably, on past experiences.

If you haven’t made the connection yet, these two characteristics are often exuded in Leftist intellectual circles, in Leftist popular culture, and in the Leftist’s moral compass.

Oftentimes, when I come across an advocate for humanitarian war (the doublespeak alone is enough to make me wonder), I am presented with the example of the mass slaughter of civilians in Rwanda during the ongoing conflict there in 1994. The gist of the argument seems to be two-fold: (1) that the West was hypocritical in its treatment of Rwanda and (2) that the West could have prevented, or at least, stunted, the horrific massacre of over half a million people in three months time. Continue reading →

Republican Presidential Primaries

Brandon Christensen Liberty , , ,

I don’t have any witty comments or analysis because I have not been watching any of the debates or following them with any vigor. I heard Romney won both Michigan and Arizona last night, which means he’ll probably get the nomination.

What are the chances that he will have a smooth ride through the GOP convention? I think Santorum and Gingrich will fall in line and support him, but Ron Paul is quietly sweeping up delegates and I think he is going to make a major stink at the convention. He will not get too radical because of his son’s future in the Party, but he’s going to force Romney to make some concessions.

I think Paul will press him on a number of issues, but Romney will only capitulate to the Federal Reserve argument Paul so often speaks about. Gold Commission 2013?

None of this matters, of course. Obama will be re-elected. From a pragmatic point of view: he has killed bin Laden, waged a successful air war against a now-dead dictator in the Middle East, and not managed to get us into any more quagmires (yet). Continue reading →

Fear and Loathing in The Wealth of Nations

Brandon Christensen Liberty , ,

I’m plowing through Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations for the first time this quarter, and I recently came upon this sociological gem:

Fear is almost all cases a wretched instrument of government, and ought in particular never to be employed against any order of men who have the smallest pretensions to independency.  To attempt to terrify them, serves only to irritate their bad humor, and to confirm in them an opposition which more gentle usage perhaps might easily induce them […]

I count this as a sociological gem because of its insights into how people with strong libertarian streaks are apt to view their government.  If there is one thing that a libertarian despises most, it may   just be the pretension of governments everywhere to demonize and demagogue a foreign people with the use of fear.

In fact, our co-blogger Jacques Delacroix has continually used this disgusting tactic to justify the violent use of force overseas to attain what he sees as benevolent ends: that of implementing democratic regimes throughout the post-colonial world.  Indeed, he writes: Continue reading →

Links From Around the Consortium

Brandon Christensen Liberty, Links , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Over at the Progress Report, Dr. Fred Foldvary writes on how we can extirpate poverty from the world.

Jacques Delacroix calls out Ron Paul’s statement about Iran being surrounded by the U.S. government.

Professor Jeffrey Rogers Hummel tackles the issue of slavery head-on in a Freeman article.

Brian Gothberg writes about the potential technology has to start protecting the ocean’s resources through property rights.

And our newest blogger, Dr. Ninos Malek, defends stereotyping (defending the undefendable is why I love being a libertarian!).

Iraq, War, and the Litmus Test of Rationality: Ron Paul Edition

Brandon Christensen Current Events, Politics, Religion , , , , , , ,

The Republican Presidential debates have been on TV for the past, what?, five or six months now, and I am proud to admit that I haven’t watched a single one of them.  By definition I am a left-leaning libertarian who thinks that free markets, limited government, and a humble foreign policy are the best tools to achieve social harmony, prosperity, and world peace.

So I had basically made up my mind on who I was going to vote for prior to the whole campaign season: Gary Johnson.  Now, co-editor Fred Foldvary has some very pertinent critiques of Governor Johnson’s tax policy proposals, but on the whole, I still think he is by far the best man to get my vote.

Because Gary Johnson does not have any baggage, a solid record while in office, and a personality that does not attract the worst of the worst to his message, he was essentially dead on arrival when he announced his Presidential campaign.  The media and its horse race would have none of it.  So he bolted the Republican Party and is now fighting for the Libertarian Party’s nomination.

I think this is a big mistake.  I think he should have stayed in the Republican Party and planned ahead for 2016.  Now, he is going to be the next Ron Paul, who also bolted the Republican Party to run as a Libertarian in 1988.  That move has cost him politically, and it is a shame that Johnson was too hot-headed with the national Party apparatus’ dismissal of his campaign. Continue reading →

Lutheran Delusions

Jacques Delacroix Liberty , , , , ,

I have this ongoing discussion by email, Facebook, and occasionally on this blog, with a female friend, a young woman I know pretty well. She is a Lutheran from a foreign country, and a hard-working person. I suspect she never reads though.

My friend claims that Lutherans are persecuted in America and in other countries. She thinks there is a deep-rooted anti-Lutheran prejudice causing the persecution. Of course, I tend to take her at her word: “Prejudice” means “prejudgment,” evaluation in advance of hard facts or, by extension, in the absence of hard facts. But facts matter and they do influence the judgment of people who are rational, intellectually honest, and unprejudiced.

My friend will easily emote on Facebook because of restrictions some countries officially place on some Lutherans’ clothing predilections. The restrictions are usually mild, applied to minors, or enacted only when police or security matters are in play, as in photographs on driver’s licenses. It turns out, the only country applying systematically restrictions on female attire, specifically, that country is 95% Lutheran.

Of course, when crazy, or simply fanatical, individuals commit individual crimes against Lutherans, my friend cries out bitterly. Yet, when a crazed non-Lutheran attacked a Jewish memorial site in Washington DC and murdered an innocent security guard of unknown religious identity, she expressed neither outrage nor sympathy. Continue reading →

Hillary Clinton on Somalia: More of the Same

Brandon Christensen Current Events , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hillary Clinton has recently called for more effort on the part of the West in the War on Terror’s Horn of Africa region by issuing threats of sanctions and more military troops in the region recently (ht John Glaser).

The threats of sanction, which libertarians consider an act of war, have been issued to states who don’t cooperate with the West in their efforts to eradicate al Shabaab, an Islamic group linked to al Qaeda that controls much of the southern territory of Somalia and, until recently, sections of Mogadishu as well.

The underlying argument put forth by the West is that the Somali state itself, a creation of the West, needs to be upheld and maintained by an inclusive, democratic regime in order for stability, prosperity and an end to terrorist activities to take place in the Horn of Africa.

This is tactic is incredibly wrong, and instead of accomplishing the West’s stated aims, actually contributes to its continued failure. Continue reading →