I have a post I’ve been working on for like, three weeks now, and I just can’t seem to finish it. Stay tuned!
I have Obama ennui and petroleum fatigue so, here is a story.
In spite of its title, this story is largely about feces so, if you have a weak stomach, stop right here. It’s also about my war, stretching over several years, against raccoons.
I live close to downtown on a parcel that includes four bearing fruit trees. This ought to make me gloriously happy because I was reared in a big city where I always longed for the countryside. Now, for me, on a small scale, the old wish that cities ought to be built in the countryside has come true. The problem is that a tribe of impudent raccoons lives nearby on an untended cliff. For half the year, one or another of my trees is bearing fruits and the raccoons make nightly visits, singly or in groups. Generally, that would be OK with me: Share and share alike, I say. However, raccoons apparently feel the need to defecate soon after they eat, nearly always on my property, in this case. In fact, they are so regular (so to speak), that they always do it on the roof of a low shed adjacent to a lovely small sun-deck. I spent significant money two years ago to build a grape arbor above the sun-deck. I had visions of myself writing outdoors and lazily reaching up for my own dangling grapes.
In the past, I have won indecisive victories with a b.b. gun used at close range. I say indecisive because, one particularly ornery old mama I had shot in the ass several time retaliated by leaving a turd right plum in the middle of my bathroom’s skylight. Continue reading
Wouldn’t that be so bad ass? Or am I just a geek?
The New York Times picks up on concepts that libertarians have been talking about for years. From the article:
The great paradox of the European Union, which is built on the concept of shared sovereignty, is that it lowers the stakes for regions to push for independence.
Has the NYT been reading Notes On Liberty? That’s a tongue-in-cheek question, of course, but one that makes me feel smug and sexy at the same time!
I have largely addressed the crisis in Europe from a political standpoint on this blog, and I don’t see that changing much over the next few years. Fiscal responsibility and civil society can only flourish if political institutions are well-defined.
The NYT article decided to quote a scholar at the European Council on Foreign Relations (which is not *sigh* a think tank dedicated to furthering the interests of a small, elite circle of bankers and industrialists) instead of me: Continue reading
Fascists Arrest Woman Blogger
Links to the Spanish and English language blogs of a brave Cuban blogger have been on this blog for years. This courageous anti-dictatorship woman’s name is Yoani Sanchez. She was arrested recently by the Castro fascist police. Below is her communication from the English language blog. Notably, I was unable to reach her Spanish blog today.
Read the rest, and do your part to help spread the word. Thugs like Castro would have been gone a long time ago if more people like the arrested blogger had stood up and said ‘no’ the first time around.
It doesn’t help that thugs in DC put sanctions on the Cuban state, either, but I am digressing…
Separatist agitations in Spain have prompted some observers to reconsider the concept of secession as a viable option in politics again. The BBC has a very good report here, and the Economist has an even better one here.
When I was taking an Honors course on Western civilization and we got to the European Union, a thought immediately came to my head and I shared it with the class: does the European Union mean the demise of the big nation-states of Europe?
My hope is that it will, but my Professor and my Left-leaning classmates either thought ‘no’ or had not thought about this question at all. One sexy girl did think it was possible, though I think she was just humoring me so that I would ask her out on a date (yes, I did, but she couldn’t get into UCLA, though, so she ended up at Berkeley!).
I thought about the confederation of states in Europe that the EuroZone has created, and remembered that many regions within the nation-states of Europe have harbored separatist sentiments since being absorbed into the nation-states of Europe (sometimes hundreds of years ago, sometimes decades ago), as well as the peaceful split-up of Czechoslovakia into two states within the EuroZone.
The purpose of the nation-states was to streamline trade between regions by standardizing trading policy and eliminating parochial tariffs that regions within the nation-states had erected over the course of centuries. So, in what is now Germany, for example, there were hundreds of small states that each had their own economic policies, and most of these states had erected protectionist tariffs, even on neighboring states. The German state standardized trading policy in what is now Germany so that a tariff-free zone of trade eventually emerged within Germany. The federal set-up of the United States accomplished the same thing.
Now, though, the European Union has essentially taken the place of the nation-state as the chief entity in charge of standardizing trading policies in Europe. My line of thought leads me to conclude that this political setup is a great opportunity for regions that have been absorbed into larger nation-states to assert more fiscal (local taxes) and political (local elections) independence because of these region’s new interdependence with a larger part of the European economy thanks to the elimination of tariffs between the larger nation-states currently in place. In short, the confederation has provided the opportunity for smaller states to emerge while at the same time eliminating the parochial and self-defeating aspects (trade policy) of small state polities that often accompanies “smallness.” The best of both worlds has the chance to flower: local governance and total participation in world trade.
I realize that the EuroZone shot itself in the foot with the creation of a central bank and the attempts to delegate to itself ever more political power, but with these two blemishes notwithstanding the European Union is a good thing for both peace and prosperity.
The question of secession in political science has recently emerged as a good one for many scholars, but unfortunately their focus has tilted heavily towards Europe and Canada (Quebec and Nunavut). If we apply this concept to other regions of the globe – especially China, Africa, the Middle East and India – then the notions of violence and despotism that Westerners largely harbor towards these regions disappears.
I hope this makes sense. If it doesn’t you know where the ‘comments’ section is!
Been busy lately. My goal for the rest of the year is to post more often.
My laptop was stolen earlier this summer, so it has been tough for me, but I can manage now. I hope to have some cool stuff coming up soon.
Stay tuned y’all!
Dr. Foldvary is renowned for his predictive capabilities, especially after calling the 2008 financial crash in 2007. However, I’d like to highlight his keen sense of direction and justice in regards to foreign affairs as well.
From a 2005 article on the situation in the Middle East, Dr. Foldvary writes:
Before Israel become an independent state in 1948, there were 150,000 Jewish citizens in Iraq. Israelites have lived in Iraq for over 2500 years. In 586 B.C.E., Babylon conquered Judea and brought many Jews to what is now Iraq. Baghdad later became a major center of Jewish thought. During the 1930s and 1940s, Nazi ideology infected the Arab region. In 1941, led by a mufti allied with Nazi Germany, there was a pro-Nazi coup, followed by killing, raping, and looting of Jews. Iraqi Jews call this the “Farhud,” or “violent dispossession.” The British army then came in and squashed the pogrom.
After World War II, the government of Iraq enacted Nazi-like anti-Jewish laws. Most of Iraq’s Jews fled to Israel. In 1952, the Iraqi government prohibited Jews from emigrating. Additional restrictions were placed on Jews in 1963 when the Ba’ath Party came to power. After 1967, Jewish property was confiscated and Jews were executed. Most remaining Jews were allowed to emigrate from Iraq during the 1970s.
This Jew-hating ideology still reigns in Iraq. There is also a concern that if Iraqi Jews are allowed to return and become Iraqi nationals, they will seek to be compensated for their confiscated property. Also, if Iraqis abroad are able to vote in Iraqi elections, Israeli Iraqis would be voting also, and many Iraqi Arabs don’t want foreign Jews voting in their elections.
Muslims, especially Arabs, denounce Israel for not letting Arab Palestinians return to their original places. How, then, can Arabs justify not allowing Jews to return?
Now Dr. Foldvary is not pointing fingers, mind you. He’s just trying to point out the intricacies of Middle Eastern politics and introduce a level of fairness in the whole damned process. Do read the whole thing.
I have been engaged in an incessant informal study of the irrationality of otherwise sane, intelligent, well-educated people. Obviously, the question of why the insane are sometimes irrational is not riveting. Less obviously, it’s possible to think of irrationality in the unlettered as a substitute for real knowledge. (Say belief in the virtues of tea made from the penis bone of tigers instead of Viagra.) When the sane intelligent, well-educated talk or act irrational, there is a puzzle worth solving.
Since I left academia, I have stopped being the rigorous sociologist that I used to be. “Rigorous” in this context means using reliable tests to determine the relationship – if any – between ideas and facts. In this sentence, “reliable tests” means “well-tested tests.” Tests who are known to give results you can trust almost all the time. The tests that the social sciences use have not lost any credibility in my eyes. There is zero rejection involved in my shift of interests. Thus, if there is appears to be a difference in incomes between the criminal and the law-abiding and if it’s not statistically significant, I still believe one should assume that difference in incomes has no effect on criminality. (“Poverty does not cause crime.”)
I have simply shifted my interest to issues that are interesting but that the social sciences seldom address. One of the reasons is that some interesting questions seem to not lend themselves to rigorous testing, precisely. (There are other reasons I will address if someone asks.) So, I am searching for hypotheses and immediately assessing their plausibility. Plausibility is now my central criteria of judgment. Correspondingly, I am careful not to affirm. My quest for an understanding of the irrationality of the usually rational is a part of this endeavor. In this context,I am using, exploiting shamelessly several young people I know well. They are superior specimens of the human race from the standpoint of intelligence, interest in ideas and propensity for hard work. I am not picking on the feeble-minded! Continue reading
This is worth recycling, I think. Has not aged a day!
I have a question. I don’t know many labor union liberals or hereditary Democrats because of where I live. It’s a small town in central California dominated by leftists and Greens. Over the years, they have pushed out every manufacturing industry. Recently, the county closed a small cement plant, the employer of 80% in the relevant village. The same forces are setting to go after tiny and inventive surfboard makers. As a result of all this saving of the environment, the unionized blue-collar class has vanished from the area.
Nearly all the liberals I know are trust-fund babies, unemployed, divorced women on alimony, absurdly overpaid public employees, and people who style themselves intellectuals because they finished college. To be fair, I also know a fair number of university professors. Here is my question:
Why are all the liberals I know, without exception, terrific snobs?
I mean that they like to discourse about little-known wines, that they read boring books (or pretend to), and that they profess to like cerebral French movies I don’t even get although I know the language. Many also airily chat about exotic foods, but not so much in my presence because they realize just from my accent that I might know that stuff.
I almost forgot; there is also what liberals never do, wouldn’t be caught dead doing. They never watch trash on television for example. No reality TV, no Lifetime Channel, and certainly no “Monster Quest” on the History Channel. (If the crypto-biologists ever catch a live Sasquatch, Mr and Ms Liberal will be the last ones to know.) They survive on a straight diet of opera and scholarly discussions of long-dead unknown writers by professors who sound themselves long-dead. That’s all on NPB, of course, the government-approved, I mean the government- subsidized network.
And, of course, their most visible current style leaders, Barack and Michelle, did not take their summer vacation on Lake Michigan, or in Colorado’s beautiful mountains, or in Florida where the sea is always warm, or in Southern California where it’s always sunny. Do you remember where they went? Who else goes there?
So, I am wondering if it’s just me, my sample – which may not be representative – or if others have noticed a link between liberal political postures on the one hand and snobbery, on the other hand.
If you have noticed the same link please tell me of your speculations about why it might exist. Use the “Comment” option on this blog. I don’t censor though I might comment on your comment if you talk like a lying sac. I don’t edit for grammar or spelling unless you ask me to do so explicitly.
There is a big stupid redwood tree in the tiny plot in front of my house. It’s stupid because it would be much better off in the forest with its brothers, less than two miles away, rather than littering the sidewalk and threatening my roof. To make matters worse, the utilities company appears to have the right to trim it any way it wants. So, my sequoia looks like an old toilet brush. The city of Santa Cruz won’t let me cut it down and it has the impudence to ask for a special high fee merely to hear my appeal.
Santa Cruz has no manufacturing. It was all run out of town in past years by the left-wing/Green political class. It’s squeezed between the usually breezy Pacific Ocean one one side and wooded mountains on the other. The wind is from the west, from the ocean, four days out of five. My stupid redwood tree right downtown is essential to maintain air purity, I am sure!
Anyway, the redwood tree has one redeeming virtue: It’s home to an abundant and varied fauna. At the apex is a large population of squirrels. They seem to be divided into two tribes, or two ethnic groups. One tribe is red with a tinge of brown, as you would expect in California. The other tribe’s coloring ranges from jet-black to kind of black. The racial strife between the two groups is incessant. At sunrise, they pursue one another across my roof. All day, they set ambushes and they chase the other guys up and down the tree and on the ground.
It’s not always clear what the squirrel warfare is all about. There seems to be plenty of living space for all (“lebensraum,” in German). Or it’s only the old guys fighting over mating rights. Or the old females just being bitchy. Or it’s the young guys that are aggressive because they seldom get any. I know however what they are not fighting about. They are not merely fighting about food as you would expect ordinary forest-dwelling squirrels to do, for example, that must tear each others’ eyes out for every tiny pine cone seed, even every little bitter-tasting acorn. Continue reading
I have sorted thing out finally and I am old enough to have rid myself of nearly all social pressures on my preferences. I figure there are only four things I really like, four keys to my happiness. Here they are:
I like writing and I like re-writing. That’s any time of day or night that I am awake. I enjoy writing just about everything, including stories, essays, scholarly papers, but also advertising slogans, and even technical “how-to” notices. I write on my PC but also long-hand, even on the back of envelopes. Sometimes, people even read what I write. My friends think I have a self-esteem problem because I am pleased with just about everything I write. I have no clear idea of what they mean. I am mostly happy because I write nearly every day.
I like foods that taste like themselves, beef that tastes only like beef and fish that tastes like fish. There are a few exceptions though. It’s OK for tripe to carry other flavors. That would be cow stomach, served as menudo, in Spanish, for example. In season, I eat fresh cauliflower raw with a little vinegar. I can do that five meals in a row without tiring. As a rule, I will eat anything any other human being anywhere eats as long as it’s distinctive. I make only two exceptions: Ordinarily, I would not consume people, or even dogs whose name I know.
Nouvelle Cuisine is not for me. It’s just putting together foods that don’t belong on the same plate and sprinkling them with raspberry vinegar. California Cuisine just means eating fresh vegetables. My grandmother advised much the same and she was not from California. Almost any wine will do to accompany my food. I have no refinement in that respect (or in any other) and I don’t pretend to.
I am married to an intelligent, resourceful woman who would rather please me than not, at least much of the time. I am a decent cook myself. My tastes are not luxurious. Usually, my food is satisfying. So, I am happy most of the time.
A silvery, bounding fish hooked while trolling under sail on a sunny day at sea, I like desperately. Why “desperately”? Because it’s only happened four times. Each instance occupies an unseemly amount of space in my pleasure memory.
Making love ziplessly to a needy woman who is almost a stranger, I really, really like. It happened more than four times but it was a long time ago so, I am not even completely sure I was involved anymore.
© Jacques Delacroix 2008, 2009
In my elementary school, we began every day with the Pledge of Allegiance. Each morning, I and 29 of my ten-year-olds colleagues would tramp to school around 8:45, hang up our coats, take off our boots or rubbers when the weather was bad, put our books in the old-fashioned lift-top desks with attached chairs, and fool around while waiting for the bell to ring at 9:00 a.m. When it did, we would all quiet down, stand in line to the right of our desks, place our right hand over our hearts, and look at the upper right-hand corner of the classroom. Hanging there was an American flag next to a loudspeaker attached to the school’s public address system. Immediately after the bell, the school principal’s voice would emanate from the loudspeaker and lead us in the Pledge. Every school day for each of the last five years, we had mumbled the same meaningless words in unison, continually reaffirming our allegiance to the republic for Richard Stanz. But this day, something was different.
Immediately following the Pledge, our teacher instructed us to take out our “social studies” books. This was the day we were reading about the Soviet Union and why it was such a bad place. Our book explained (in language appropriate for fifth graders) that the Soviet Union was bad because its government enforced conformity on its citizens. To drive this point home, the book contained a picture of an elementary school class in the USSR showing the boys and girls lined up beside their desks (all wearing uniforms and hats with little red stars on them) reciting something in unison. Looking at the picture, something clicked in my ten-year-old brain and I thought, “Hey, didn’t we just do that? If government-enforced conformity is bad in Russia, why isn’t it bad here?”
From John Hasnas. Do read the whole thing.
I’ve been on summer break for the last few days, but I’ll be back on here regularly. Soon. 🙂 Hope you’re all enjoying the last remnants of a most memorable summer.
I don’t know what’s in the Koran and I don’t care to know. I do know something about the Christian Bible, which is a mishmash of wisdom, poetry, geneology, misogyny, chauvinism, homophobia, fratricide, etc. The Bible can be used to defend just about any position and the same is likely true of the Koran.
To my mind, neither the historical Jesus (if he existed) nor the mythological Jesus is above reproach and the same is true of the historical or mythological “Prophet” Mohammed. If some followers of these figures believe their faith is so fragile that it cannot stand criticism and that they must advocate violent suppression of dissent, then their faith, whether Christian or Islamic, stands condemned. But intolerance among Christians is confined to a tiny few these days whereas intolerance seems to be widespread among Muslims. Thus we see laws that outlaw criticism of Islam or the “Prophet” in many countries.
As to the video which supposedly prompted the storming of the Libyan consulate and the murder of the U.S. ambassador, I have no taste for such things and don’t plan to watch it. But I do know that my own freedom is safest when such extreme expressions of opinion are protected. That’s why in these pages I defended the late Lester Maddox’s exercise of his freedom of association in running his chicken restaurant in Georgia.
I’m still waiting for the President or the Secretary of State to say even one word about freedom of speech, freedom of religion, or freedom of thought, which are the core issues here. All I heard from the President was a condemnation of the video. I don’t want him to threaten to impose free-speech rules on Libya or Egypt but simply to explain to the world that we uphold free speech in this country – period.
Back to Islam. Without knowing anything of Islamic theology, we can draw some conclusions about Islam from the status of the Muslim countries. Human rights are trampled, especially if you’re female, gay, a member of the wrong Islamic sect, or worse yet, a Christian or Jew. Virtually no scientific or technological advances have come out of Islamic countries in recent centuries. I am unaware of any significant recent Islamic artistic or literary accomplishments. A medieval view of interest is still in effect. Corrupt monarchies and corrupt theocracies rule many of the countries, notwithstanding the Arab Spring. Assad is butchering his own people in Syria.
In summary, Islam sucks. But even worse, the moral midget in the White House, the supposed leader of the free world, is silent on the essence of the conflict of Islamic versus enlightened Western values.
The arrest of international banker Dominique Strauss Kahn on several charges amounting to sexual assault has occasioned more discussion of sex on the airwaves than I have heard for many years. Some of the statements I hear are absurd or annoying. Others are downright dishonest. I am trying to sort out the most salient points.
Warning: If you are prudish, don’t read what follows. If you are under fifteen, read at the risk of undermining your healthy sexual development.
First things first: A couple of days ago, the Spanish minister of economy and finance, I think, was one of many female commentators committing a deeply immoral amalgam. One the one hand, she said, there is the presumption of innocence, on the other hand, the charges are so serious, so awful. It’s common thinking in academia among bureaucrats in charge of hunting down sexual harassment, sex discrimination, and in the end, sex differences.
Here is a reminder, girls: The seriousness of an alleged crime, whatever great, has no influence on innocence. Those are separate things completely. Get this: Continue reading
I offer an essay written by a student in a beginning college English class. I was moved by the story she had to tell of how the drug warriors inflicted so much suffering on her terminally ill boyfriend and on her. Her manner is reserved but it the anguish comes through loud and clear.
These days the documentaries and media reports are hard to miss. Opiate and opioid abuse has become epidemic in many of our poorer states. In an attempt to get high, people have begun illegally buying prescription pain medications such as Oxycontin, and creating new and unusual ways to snort, shoot and shove in to places it was never intended to go. According to the media the drug dealers are no longer the creeps on the street corner pushing to kids, but rather the pharmaceutical companies, patient advocacy groups and doctors who have managed to improve on and promote what many are convinced is a curse on society.I guess you can’t blame the media for telling a good story complete with tragedy, multibillion dollar villains, and clever names such as “hillbilly heroine” for this country’s current drug of choice. What bothers me is how one sided these stories have become. Rarely do you see the people who are in so much chronic physical or emotional pain that these types of drugs can be life sustaining despite the physical addiction that comes with it. I guess the media does not find these people sensational enough to focus on, but when the dust settles they will likely be the ones who end up losing the most from this “epidemic”. Thanks to our fears and the media that plays on them the majority of Americans have been convinced that all drug addiction is bad, and should be avoided at all cost even when it can ease the severe pain of some. I have seen the good that these strong pain relievers can offer the right people and would like to explain the other side to the opiate’s story.
The source of our modern day opiates is the opium poppy, a plant whose existence and use actually predates written history. Often called, “God’s own medicine” ever since people discovered that it was more than just a pretty face; mankind has had a love-hate relationship with the opium poppy. Similar to the way our endorphins work the active ingredients in opium trigger the opioid receptors in the brain, central nervous system and throughout the body. This creates not only pain relief, but also a strong sense of pleasure, and well being. For many who are in severe pain these results can bring life to a person who otherwise would be forced to live in a world without relief. Several years ago I knew little about opiates, and like most people I believed their use was only for those who simply no longer cared. It was not until I met my boyfriend that I understood what a positive effect it could have for some.
My boyfriend Dave lived with chronic pain. His doctor had put him on a regular supply of Vicodin which helped to not only relieve that pain, but also gave him energy, so he no longer had to spend all his time in bed. Unfortunately when opiates are taken regularly the body will build up a tolerance, and physical addiction will develop. A good doctor will understand that their patient will eventually need an increase in their dosage, and no patient should ever be put in a position where they are forced to withdraw abruptly from their medication without professional help. Well that is the way it is supposed to work isn’t it? Dave’s doctor either was not aware of how addictions can form, or more likely was simply afraid to increase the dose due to the scrutiny put on doctors who are thought to be too generous with the pain medications they prescribe. When we finally accepted that his doctor hands were tied we went looking for an alternative.
I will never forget the first time we went to buy Vicodin off the street. There were actually people who had walked straight out of the hospital still attached to IV poles selling their prescription drugs. Heroin addicts hung out on the corners trying to fund their habits by helping newbies like us connect with the right people. Sometimes they were very helpful most of the time not, but Dave always tipped them anyway knowing that the pain from withdrawal is still the same regardless of how you get there. This was an end station for many. With the risk of arrest, or assault running high, most of the people there had nothing left to lose. The fact that my boyfriend had to spend the final years of his life going through so much to get some relief will always anger me. It nearly ruined him financially, and the stress alone likely took time off his already short life. Dave was a person who believed you should always work hard to get ahead, and play by the rules. He did what he could to help others, but when the time came there was no one there willing, or able to help him.
I would never underestimate the power of opium, and the drugs it has produced. Call it what you wish: “hillbilly heroine” or “God’s own medicine” — this is a drug that can give life just as fast as it can take it away. I am sure that some will argue, where is the line drawn? If our laws were to allow easier access to opiates wouldn’t most of the addicts simply claim that their use is medical? I guess if we lived in a perfect world a well-informed adult would be allowed to decide for themselves what substances they put inside their body, and accept responsibility for the choices they have made. We clearly do not live in such a world, so the next best thing is to make sure that the people who have a legitimate reason to take these drugs will still have access to them.
My ultimate fear is that with so much controversy surrounding them, opiates will eventually be made illegal. People like my boyfriend have enough challenges without having to spend all of their time and finances chasing down a drug that they should have legal access to. Maybe it’s time to turn the typical Oxycontin story on its head, and shine a light on the other side. If people can learn to stop thinking in black and white maybe then our medical community will finally be able to do their job, and start offering the support and resources that these people are entitled to.
Notes On Liberty 