Over on Cal Ulmann‘s blog Where HipHop and Libertarianism meet, he points out a simple truth
Bush says quitting drugs will stop terrorism. Well then why can’t marijuana that is grown on American soil be given to medical marijuana patients?
Quite so.
|
|||||
|
Over on Cal Ulmann‘s blog Where HipHop and Libertarianism meet, he points out a simple truth
Quite so. Over on National Review, Jonah Goldberg remains in the hole and appears to be digging with all his might. He writes in The Libertarian Lie:
Gosh, I wonder why she might think that? Could it be that she actually has a genuine objective philosophical underpinning to her ideas? Just a guess.
Of course not for a moment did I expect Goldberg to actually recognize Karl Popper‘s theory of rational falliblism. Those sort of ideas inevitably lead to the rejection of irrational dogmatism of the sort which underpins Mr. Goldberg’s flavour of anti-intellectual intuitive conservatism. So what does his defence upon finding his views challenged intellectually amount to? “No fair! You’re using big words!” Thank you for living up to my expectations, Jonah. And by the way, if you are going to insult the Samizdata, you could at least have given us a link! Sheesh. Over on The Fly Bottle blogista Will Wilkinson writes about Totalitarian Chic.
It reminds me of someone catching sight of my collection of pretty enameled Soviet Political Activists Pins, Red Army Hats and ‘Heroic Soviet Worker’ posters. As he was well aware of my anti-communist background, I saw his eyebrows raise. Heading off his question I interjected.
He understood immediately. In an EU Observer report, the authoritarian nature of the European ‘Union’ is demonstrated yet again as Swedish citizen, Per Johansson, has been expelled from Belgian and can no longer travel in 14 European countries after pasting up an anti-EU poster at a Belgian police station. The Belgian police in Brussels arrested the Swede, who is an active member of a legal Swedish left wing party, just three days before the Laeken summit. The police expelled the man for only one reason: he had been helping friends putting up the poster, announcing an anti-EU meeting. Hopefully such cack-handed suppression of dissent will just encourage more resistance against the EU by people who value freedom of expression, free association and reject unaccountable socialist diktats governing every aspect of civil life. Prankster Samizdata reader James Bennett wrote in with a suggestion that was alarming and amuzing in equal measure:
Now that is funny. Pulling that off would be a superb cultural ‘hack’ of the highest order. Just the other day I saw a Next Generation episode and already in my mind I am seeing cringing, hand wringing Ferengi runts (Nazi ‘Jew’ image) contrasted with tall lithe Tasha Yar (Denise Crosby: Nazi Aryan ‘superwoman’ image) along with broad shouldered small brained Will Riker (Johnathen Frakes: Nazi Aryan ‘superman’ image) declaiming about the Federation’s cultural superiority (kulturkampf) to the capitalist Ferengi (Jew). Appalling. Damn you, Bennett, I will never be able to see that show again without feeling rather uncomfortable. Prominent Libertarian Alliance member Sean Gabb has just produced a very useful and quite lengthy missive called Arguments Against British Membership of the Euro. Also by Sean Gabb, see A Case Against the European Union and Uniting Europe without the Union Highly recommended to anyone who refuses to accept the accelerating rate at which authoritarian European principles and institutions are being forced on British society. What is being done by our ‘masters’ with breathtaking extra-parliamentary manoeuvres in the name of European integration would, in less dissembling times, have been called treason. Natalie is quite right that there is a noticeable lack of real religions in Star Trek. The only two sets of religious beliefs seem to feature prominently: First there are the Bajoran in Deep Space 9, who follow an (invented) organised national religion that, it must be said, is presented extremely plausibly and without either sentimental support or anti-religious bias: some of their religious leaders are shown to be wise and honourable, yet others (Kai Winn) are portrayed as venal and corrupt. Significantly, the Bajorans are not, however, part of the Federation. Then there is Chakotay (Robert Beltran), whose ultra-PC North American Indian spiritualism must appeal to the California ‘liberal’ (meaning socialist) sensibilities of the script writers. It is useful to note, however, that Chakotey is not in fact a member of Star Fleet even though he has been co-opted by it. Quite the contrary: he is an anti-Star Fleet Maquis rebel! There is an interesting subtext there for sure. I would not include the Zen-like Vulcan philosophy shown in the shows as ‘religion’ as it is little more than a sophisticated and somewhat ritualised form of self-control with a set of attendant logic based ethics. Yet I must disagree with Natalie that Star Trek’s lack of religion in the Federation will cause “less sympathy with the Samizdata crowd”. Libertarian views are in no way antithetical to religious ones and I find the complete absence of overt Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Hindu influences (let alone obvious adherents) indicative of a society that must surely be suppressing them. Even an atheist such as myself must accept that the religious impulse will not completely disappear quietly into the night unless forced there at the point of a loaded phaser…hardly something calculated to bring the smile of reason to libertarian lips. As evidence of it is completely absent in what is posited as mankind’s sole military service, the implications are clear. Even if Star Fleet is aggressively secular ‘at work’, in many episodes we are shown the private quarters of crew members…can anyone recall an episode in which a crucifix is seen on someone’s table or a mezuzah by the door? You do not have to be religious yourself to find seeing religion completely edited out of the human experience more than a little sinister. As Natalie points out, Babylon 5 had a great deal of fun with real world religion, even to the extent of showing peevish squabbling between the leader of the resident Catholic monks and a prominent Jewish scholar. Likewise, Commander Susan Ivanova (Claudia Christian) on several occasions referred to her Jewish identity in various episodes. Although religion was not central to the show, it did not deny its very existence. Next time I see a Star Trek show, I will scrutinize the credits for any references to Leon Trotsky. No doubt fearful that having Al Qaeda members floating around their country is going to result in US military action against Yeman, it seems that the government of Yeman has decided to not be the next ‘Taliban’ on the US hit list. Pravda reports (As usual in Pravda the English in the article is a bit bizarre)
It may well be that the best thing to come out of the destruction of the Taliban in Afghanistan, due to the presence of Al Qaeda, is a message has been heard loud and clear throughout the Islamic world: playing host to third parties who engage in the mass murder of Americans can be extremely hazardous to your government’s health. A tip of the turban to Charles Tupper Jr for pointing out the Pravda article It is good to hear that Dmitry is finally free to return to Russia. What puzzles me about this case is how did a US court even feel they had the appropriate jurisdiction to try him? The way I understand it, he wrote the decryption software in Russia, for a Russian company, ElcomSoft. The software is entirely legal in Russia and yet somehow because the program can crack codes in ways prohibited by the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Sklyarov was arrested when he visited a conference in the USA. Imagine for a moment that a US citizen, living the USA, writes an article in the Wall Street Journal (a newspaper which is sold world wide). Say that in this article, the US journalist makes remarks that are illegal in Russia (a nation not known for its free press) but in the USA are protected by the First Amendment and hence entirely legal. How would the USA react if, when that journalist makes the mistake of going to Russia to attend some conference, he gets arrested by the Russian police, thrown in jail and charged with a crime because the Wall Street Journal with the offending remarks was also available in Moscow hotels? Would some US lawyer care to explain how that works? |
|||||
![]()
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||