Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

Sunday, 28 January 2018

Larry Correia’s Advice to Writers — It’s Also Valid for Liberty Activists

Filed under: entertainment, Media, Politics, Principles — Tags: , — mikewb1971 @ 3:11 PM (15:11)

Fantasy writer Larry Correia offers some advice to other writers in a recent Facebook post

Here is a quick object lesson for writers about why you should never ever give a crap what perpetually offended social justice reviewers say about your stuff.

Back in 2011, Mike Kupari and I released a novel called Dead Six. It’s a great book. A thriller with two competing narrators, trying to kill each other.

Well, one of the main bad guys in D6 is this mysterious crime figure known only as Big Eddie. This dude is so dangerous, and involved in so much organized crime, that at the beginning my main character thinks Big Eddie is just a term for a cabal of powerful string pullers. Eddie is just that connected and terrifying.

Only later on, we actually meet Big Eddie. And it turns out that his public persona is as a spoiled rich guy, heir to a big family fortune, and I based him on Carson from Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. Only deeply disturbed, incredibly violent, and a criminal genius mastermind.

He’s also gay. (In actuality, Eddie’s sexual orientation is Hurt People) but he hams it up in his public persona, as it helps hide his truly dangerous nature.

One of my favorite villains I ever created, really popular among readers, and he’s so over the top that when Bronson Pinchot narrated the audiobook, he told me it was one of the funnest roles he’d ever taken (keeping in mind, he was Serge in Beverly Hills Cop and stole the show from Eddie Murphy when he was at the top of his game). And it got nominated for the Audie for Best Thriller.

But angry Social Justice reviewers screamed at me anyway. Having a crazy bad guy be gay was deeply offensive. Homophobic. Triggered. Hatemongery. You know, all the usual stuff. HOW DARE YOU HAVE AN EVIL PSYCHO BE GAY! REEEEE!

So fast forward to this week, and there’s a petition floating around to force DC to make the Joker gay . . .

Yes . . . The Joker. So if they don’t make this charismatic psychotic criminal mastermind gay . . . Then they’re homophobic.

But when I wrote a charismatic psychotic criminal mastermind as gay, I was homophobic.

Basically, no matter what you do, they’re going to be pissed off. You will never ever make these people happy for long. If you comply with their demands, that’s just showing weakness, and the first time you cross one of their invisible lines, they’ll just start screaming at you again. So remember, just write whatever you want, and the critics can go back to eating Tide Pods.

I’ve experienced this sort of shrieking directed at myself in the libertarian movement, both inside the Libertarian Party and outside of it, as well.

I’ve witnessed this sort of hysteria levelled at others.

When people harangue me with this sort of nonsense, I find it difficult to stay pissed off at them. They’re mostly annoyances in the long run.

As Larry tells writers, don’t worry about your detractors. Any attempt on your part to appease them will fail in the long run — they’ll simply find another reason to stick knives in your back.

When they tell you “YOU CAN’T SAY THAT!” about something you’ve said verbally or written, reply with “What do you mean, I can’t say that? I just did say it.”

When they tell you what sort of rhetorical style to use, respond with “Don’t tell me how to do this — SHOW ME.”

In earlier days (1997-2011), I was producing and hosting a public-access TV show here in Albuquerque titled The Weekly Sedition. Someone told me you can’t be like that on the air.” I replied to that with “Anyone who doesn’t like how we run the show is free to sign up at Channel 27, put their own show on, and show us how it’s done.” I then provided the station’s phone number and physical address, so he would have less of an excuse for non-performance. My detractor backed off almost immediately, saying that he “didn’t intend to offend anyone.”

Ghods, I LOVED doing that show every week.

In short, don’t do a thing to appease the Socialist Just-Us Whiners, because you’ll never appease them for long, and you’ll end up tossing your own soul into the trash bin in the process.

It. Just. Is. Not. Worth. It.

Just do it YOUR WAY, and have fun in the process.


NOTES

  1. Published at The Libertarian EnterpriseNumber 958 – 28 January 2018
  2. Approximate reading level – 10.1
  3. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook [page / profile] / Gab / Google Plus / Liberty.me / Liberty Society / Minds / Tea Party Community / Twitter / VK / WordPress.com
    2. Albuquerque Liberty Forum Facebook page
    3. KCUF Media Facebook page
    4. The Weekly Sedition Facebook page
    5. New Mexico Libertarians Facebook group
    6. The Libertarian Enterprise Facebook group

Advertisements

Sunday, 14 January 2018

Pot Freedom from Ortiz y Pino? Think Again!

Filed under: Politics, Principles — Tags: , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 8:04 PM (20:04)

Recently, State Senator Gerald Ortiz y Pino proposed an amendment to the New Mexico State Constitution (SJR4). Ostensibly, the purpose of this amendment is to make marijuana “legal,” so pot smokers will suffer less harassment from State, county and municipal law enforcement agencies here in New Mexico.

The more unscrupulous and gullible of those calling for more freedom on marijuana will say this amendment is a good one.

Ah, but the very title of SJR4 gives away the game —

SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 4 — PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 20 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF NEW MEXICO THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR POSSESSION AND PERSONAL USE OF MARIJUANA ONLY IF THE LEGISLATURE REGULATES THE PRODUCTION, PROCESSING, TRANSPORTATION, SALE AND TAXATION OF MARIJUANA AND PROVIDES FOR REVENUES FROM THE TAXATION OF MARIJUANA TO BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE GENERAL FUND.

In other words, marijuana only becomes “legal” under the NM Statutes Annotated IF the Legislature regulates and taxes the marijuana industry, then Taxation and Revenue puts the funds garnished from those taxes into the general kitty, for the Legislature to play with, hand out as legalized favors or bribes, or whatever.

Come on, folks &#151 doesn’t government at all levels intrude into your lives too much already?

Do you really want to give the politicians and their pet bureaucrats MORE power to put their eyes, noses, fingers, and other appendages into your life?

Do you really want to hand over MORE cash to them so they can have the finer things in life, maybe things that YOU might aspire to have yourself?

Let’s face it — government intrusion into private industry is the legalized version of the plata o plomo (“silver or lead”) offer that the Colombian cocaine cartels would make, meaning “take the money (bribe) or I will take your life.” Basically, “play our way and get rich, or don’t and go to eat out of a dumpster.” Only in this case, the people who are supposed to be stopping criminal activity are the ones making it worse.

In the mean time, the “black” market in unregulated marijuana still continues to operate. Maybe with less profits than before, but it’s still there. Like untaxed cigarettes in New York City.

I can understand the desire for having your favorite stuff becoming less restricted, except it won’t really become less restricted for a large portion of the State — 63 percent of New Mexico’s land area is Federal property of one kind or another (military bases, BLM land, National Parks, Monuments, National Forests, etc.), and marijuana is still illegal at the Federal level of government. Thus you could still get arrested for possession, use, or distribution if you’re on Federal property, even in a state where it’s legal.

Blaze one up by the front doors of the BX at Kirtland, Cannon or Holloman if you think I’m joking. The SPs might not share that sense of humor.

(When the Founders put that clause about “Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings” into the U.S. Constitution, did they truly mean 63% of New Mexico, and 89% of Nevada?)

For those of you who are Democrats, did you seriously believe that Hillary Clinton was going to fight to make this better for you?!

I can just hear it now from those insisting that marijuana “must” be regulated by their favorite Political Classholes before it becomes legal again —

“If we don’t regulate it, someone will sell poisoned weed to kids!”

There’s that “we” again — that’s how the There-Oughta-Be-A-Law crazies rope you into signing on to their schemes.

And high schoolers across the country have been smoking illegal, unsanctioned weed (and trying all sorts of illegal, unsanctioned substances, too!) for fifty years now. How many of them have been demonstrably harmed by their smoking pot?

H/T to Kyle Bennett for the talky-ball meme!


NOTES

  1. Published at The Libertarian EnterpriseNumber 956 – 14 January 2018
  2. Approximate reading level – 13.3

Sunday, 24 December 2017

Santa Claus on “Benevolent Government” — Ron Paul’s 2017 Christmas Message

Filed under: Politics, Principles — Tags: , , , — mikewb1971 @ 10:39 PM (22:39)

Ron Paul
Friday, December 22, 2017 at 7:35am

Government is not Mother Teresa.

It’s not “caring,” or “compassionate,” or “humanitarian.”

It doesn’t “help” the poor . . . . It multiplies them.

It doesn’t “run the economy” . . . . It destroys it.

It doesn’t “spread freedom” . . . It squashes it.

Government is violent force.

Either that force is chained down by a Constitution, or like a fire, it’ll spread and burn down everything in its path.

H/T Sam Damewood
https://facebook.com/sam.damewood/posts/10215428210043161


NOTES

  1. Published at The Libertarian EnterpriseIssue 953 – 24 December 2017

Sunday, 5 November 2017

Remember, Remember the 5th of November

Filed under: Principles, Reading, Viewing — Tags: , , — mikewb1971 @ 11:28 PM (23:28)

People should not be afraid of their governments.

Governments should be afraid of their people.


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. DC Comics, Vertigo Comics — V for Vendetta by Alan Moore, David Lloyd, et al.
  2. Warner Bros. — V for Vendetta

Wednesday, 25 October 2017

Stupidity, Insanity and Evil in LP Land, Part the Nth

Filed under: Politics, Principles — Tags: , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 5:23 PM (17:23)

Recently, Governor Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown (D-KKKalifornia) signed a bill making it no longer a felony to knowingly infect someone with HIV [1].

Whatever happened to government being the defender of our lives, liberties, properties and pursuits of happiness[2]?

Instead, government is becoming more and more a plunderer and pillager of that which it’s supposed to protect[3].

What particularly irks me about this is that there are some who call themselves “libertarians” who prefer to let the State (in this case, Moonbeam Brown) not only define their ethics and morality, but then insist that they’re the ones abiding by the Zero Aggression Principle

I guess this is what you get when you lower your standards and insist that “everyone is a Libertarian, they just don’t know it yet.”


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. Los Angeles Times — Knowingly exposing others to HIV will no longer be a felony in California by Patrick McGreevy

    CNN — California lowers penalty for knowingly exposing partners to HIV by Alaa Elassar and Laura Diaz-Zuniga

  2. The Declaration of Independence
  3. The Law, by Frédéric Bastiat

Thursday, 12 October 2017

Clearing the Bench New Mexico

Filed under: Networking, Organizing, Politics, Principles, Resistance — Tags: , , , — mikewb1971 @ 11:56 PM (23:56)

Getting tired of judges who view the federal and State Constitutions as their personal Charmin rolls where your liberty and property are concerned?

In New Mexico, if a judge seeking to be retained during an election receives less than 57 % of the votes cast in his / her retention race, than the judge in question loses his / her spot on the bench, and returns to the private sector.

Q: What, exactly, did they do to need cleared?[1]

A: What have they done to warrant retention?

The burden of proof isn’t upon us, We The People, to prove that they warrant removal, it’s upon them to prove that they warrant retention.

The intent here with Clear the Bench New Mexico is to develop something along the lines of Clear the Bench Colorado (CTBC)

Facebook page for Clear the Bench New Mexico — feel free to share the page with friends, family, whoever!


NOTE — This is a TENTATIVE list being posted here:

State Supreme Court — Charles W. Daniels, Petra Jimenez Maes

NM Court of Appeals — Henry Bohnhoff, Emil J Kiehne, Stephen French

2nd Judicial District (Bernalillo), Division XXV, Albuquerque — Jane Levy

3rd Judicial District (Dona Ana), Division III, Las Cruces — Conrad F. Perea

5th Judicial District (Chaves, Eddy and Lea), Division X, Roswell — Dustin K. Hunter

6th Judicial District (Grant, Hidalgo & Luna), Division I, Silver City — Timothy Aldrich

7th Judicial District (Catron, Sierra, Socorro & Torrance), Division III, Estancia — Shannon Murdock

Reference: http://www.sos.state.nm.us/2017-state-of-new-mexico-roster-revised-09-27-17.pdf


NOTES

  1. Question originally posed by Jennifer Sensiba here
  2. Approximate reading level – 15.4
  3. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook [page / profile] / Gab / Google Plus / Liberty.me / Liberty Society / Minds / seen.life / Tea Party Community / Twitter / VK
    2. Albuquerque Liberty Forum Facebook page
    3. Wood Chipper Facebook page
    4. Vote the Air Facebook page
    5. Vote the Air NM Facebook page
    6. Vote Dumpster Fire Facebook page
    7. KCUF Media Facebook page
    8. Absurdist Discordian Party of New Mexico Facebook page
    9. The Weekly Sedition Facebook page
    10. New Mexico Dissent and Expose Facebook page

Thursday, 28 September 2017

A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, by John Perry Barlow

Filed under: Philosophy, Politics, Principles, Privacy, Technology — Tags: , — mikewb1971 @ 12:28 AM (00:28)

A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace

by John Perry Barlow <barlow@eff.org>

Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather.

We have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one, so I address you with no greater authority than that with which liberty itself always speaks. I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear.

Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. You have neither solicited nor received ours. We did not invite you. You do not know us, nor do you know our world. Cyberspace does not lie within your borders. Do not think that you can build it, as though it were a public construction project. You cannot. It is an act of nature and it grows itself through our collective actions.

You have not engaged in our great and gathering conversation, nor did you create the wealth of our marketplaces. You do not know our culture, our ethics, or the unwritten codes that already provide our society more order than could be obtained by any of your impositions.

You claim there are problems among us that you need to solve. You use this claim as an excuse to invade our precincts. Many of these problems don’t exist. Where there are real conflicts, where there are wrongs, we will identify them and address them by our means. We are forming our own Social Contract. This governance will arise according to the conditions of our world, not yours. Our world is different.

Cyberspace consists of transactions, relationships, and thought itself, arrayed like a standing wave in the web of our communications. Ours is a world that is both everywhere and nowhere, but it is not where bodies live.

We are creating a world that all may enter without privilege or prejudice accorded by race, economic power, military force, or station of birth.

We are creating a world where anyone, anywhere may express his or her beliefs, no matter how singular, without fear of being coerced into silence or conformity.

Your legal concepts of property, expression, identity, movement, and context do not apply to us. They are all based on matter, and there is no matter here.

Our identities have no bodies, so, unlike you, we cannot obtain order by physical coercion. We believe that from ethics, enlightened self-interest, and the commonweal, our governance will emerge. Our identities may be distributed across many of your jurisdictions. The only law that all our constituent cultures would generally recognize is the Golden Rule. We hope we will be able to build our particular solutions on that basis. But we cannot accept the solutions you are attempting to impose.

In the United States, you have today created a law, the Telecommunications Reform Act, which repudiates your own Constitution and insults the dreams of Jefferson, Washington, Mill, Madison, DeToqueville, and Brandeis. These dreams must now be born anew in us.

You are terrified of your own children, since they are natives in a world where you will always be immigrants. Because you fear them, you entrust your bureaucracies with the parental responsibilities you are too cowardly to confront yourselves. In our world, all the sentiments and expressions of humanity, from the debasing to the angelic, are parts of a seamless whole, the global conversation of bits. We cannot separate the air that chokes from the air upon which wings beat.

In China, Germany, France, Russia, Singapore, Italy and the United States, you are trying to ward off the virus of liberty by erecting guard posts at the frontiers of Cyberspace. These may keep out the contagion for a small time, but they will not work in a world that will soon be blanketed in bit-bearing media.

Your increasingly obsolete information industries would perpetuate themselves by proposing laws, in America and elsewhere, that claim to own speech itself throughout the world. These laws would declare ideas to be another industrial product, no more noble than pig iron. In our world, whatever the human mind may create can be reproduced and distributed infinitely at no cost. The global conveyance of thought no longer requires your factories to accomplish.

These increasingly hostile and colonial measures place us in the same position as those previous lovers of freedom and self-determination who had to reject the authorities of distant, uninformed powers. We must declare our virtual selves immune to your sovereignty, even as we continue to consent to your rule over our bodies. We will spread ourselves across the Planet so that no one can arrest our thoughts.

We will create a civilization of the Mind in Cyberspace. May it be more humane and fair than the world your governments have made before.

Davos, Switzerland


NOTES

  1. Original article
  2. On Freenet
  3. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook [page / profile] / Gab / Google Plus / Liberty.me / Liberty Society / Minds / seen.life / Twitter / VK / WordPress.com
    2. KCUF Media – Facebook / WordPress.com
    3. Extropy UnboundFacebook / WordPress.com
    4. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Google Plus / Twitter / WordPress.com

Monday, 25 September 2017

Freenet: The forgotten cryptopunk paradise, by “Draketo” / Arne Babenhauserheide

Freenet: The forgotten cryptopunk paradise

by “Draketo” / Arne Babenhauserheide

I planned to get this into a newspaper, but it was too technical for the Guardian and too non-practical for Linux Voice. Then my free time ran out. Today I saw Barret Brown report (freenet mirror) on his 5 years court sentence for quoting a Fox news commentator and sharing a public link. Welcome to Freenet: The forgotten cryptopunk paradise!

# Freenet: The forgotten cryptopunk paradise

A long time ago in a chatroom far away, select groups of crypto-anarchists gathered to discuss the death of privacy since the NSA could spy on all communications with ease. Among those who proposed technical solutions was a student going by the name sanity, and he published the widely regarded first paper on Freenet: A decentralized anonymous datastore which was meant to be a cryptopunk paradise: true censorship resistance, no central authority and long lifetime only for information in which people were actually interested.

Many years passed, two towers fell, the empire expanded its hunt for rebels all over the globe, and now, as the empire’s grip has become so horrid that even the most loyal servants of the emperors turn against them and expose their dark secrets to the masses, Freenet is still moving forward. Lost to the eye of the public, it shaped and reshaped itself — all the while maintaining its focus to provide true freedom of the press in the internet.

Table of Contents

A new old hope

Once only a way to anonymously publish one-shot websites into Freenet that other members of the group could see, it now provides its users with most services found in the normal internet, yet safe from the prying eyes of the empire. Its users communicate with each other using email which hides metadata, micro-blogging with real anonymity, forums on a wide number of topics — from politics to drug experiences — and websites with update notifications (howto) whose topics span from music and anime over religion and programming to life without a state and the deepest pits of depravity.

All these possibilities emerge from its decentralized datastore and the tools built on top of a practically immutable data structure, and all its goals emerge from providing real freedom of the press. Decentralization is required to avoid providing a central place for censorship. Anonymity is needed to protect people against censorship by threat of subsequent punishment, prominently used in China where it is only illegal to write something against the state if too many people should happen to read it. Private communication is needed to allow whistleblowers to contact journalists and also to discuss articles before publication, invisible access to information makes it hard to censor articles by making everyone a suspect who reads one of those articles, as practiced by the NSA which puts everyone on the watchlist who accesses Freenetproject.org (reported by German public TV program Panorama). And all this has to be convenient enough for journalists to actually use it during their quite stressful daily work. As a side effect it provides true online freedom, because if something is safe enough for a whistleblower, it is likely safe enough for most other communication too.

These goals pushed Freenet development into areas which other groups only touched much later — or not at all. And except for convenience, which is much harder to get right in a privacy-sensitive context than it seems, Freenet nowadays manages to fulfill these goals very well.

The empire strikes the web

The cloud was “invented” and found to be unsafe, yet Freenet already provided its users with a safe cloud. Email was found to spill all your secrets, while Freenet already provided its users with privacy preserving emails. Disaster control became all the rage after hurricane Katrina and researchers scrambled to find solutions for communicating on restricted routes, and Freenet already provided a globally connectable darknet on friend-to-friend connections. Blogs drowned in spam comments and most caved in and switched to centralized commenting solutions, making the fabled blogosphere into little more than a PR outlet for Facebook, but Freenet already provided spam resistance via an actually working web of trust — after seeing the non-spam-resistant forum system Frost burn when some trolls realized that true anonymity also means complete freedom to use spam bots. Censorship and total surveillance of user behavior on Facebook was exposed, G+ required users to use their real names and Twitter got blocked in many repressive regimes, whereas Freenet already provided hackers with convenient, decentralized, anonymous microblogging. Now websites are cracked by the minute and constant attacks have made it a chore for private webmasters simply to stay available, though Freenet already offers attack resistant hosting which stays online as long as people are interested in the content.

All these developments happened in a private microcosm, where new and strange ideas could form and hatch; an incubator where reality could be rethought and rewritten to reestablish privacy in the internet. The internet was hit hard, and Freenet evolved to provide a refuge for those who could use it.

The return of privacy

What started as a student’s idea was driven forward by about a dozen free time coders and one paid developer for more than a decade — funded by donations from countless individuals — and turned into a true forgotten cryptopunk paradise: actual working solutions to seemingly impossible problems, highly detailed documentation streams in a vast nothingness to be explored only by the initiated (where RTFS is a common answer: Read The Friendly Source), all this with plans and discussions about saving the world mixed in.

The practical capabilities of Freenet should be known to every cryptopunk. But a combination of mediocre user experience, bad communication and worse PR (and maybe something more sinister, if Poul-Henning Kamp should prove to be farsighted about project Orchestra) brought us to a world where a new, fancy, half finished, partially thought through, cash-cow searching project comes around and instead of being asked “how’s that different from Freenet?”, the next time I talk to a random crypto-loving stranger about Freenet I am asked “how is Freenet different from X which just made the news?” (the answer which fits every single time is: “Even if X should work, it would provide only half of Freenet, and none of the really important features — friend-to-friend darknet, access dependent content lifetime, decentralized spam resistance, stable pseudonyms, hosting without a server”).

Right now, many years of work have culminated in a big step forward for Freenet. It is time for Freenet to re-emerge from hiding and take its place as one of the few privacy tools actually proven to work — and as the single tool with the most ambitious goal: Reestablishing freedom of the press and freedom of speech in the internet.

Join in

If you do not have the time for large scale contribution, a good way to support freenet is to run and use it — and ask your friends to join in, ideally over darknet.

freenetproject.org

Since the focus of Freenet has been on the big goals, there are lots of low hanging fruit; small tasks which allow reaping the fruits of existing solutions to hard problems. For example my recent work on Freenet includes 4 hours of hacking the Python based site uploader in pyFreenet which sped up the load time of its sites by up to a factor of 4. If you are an interested software developer and want to join, come to #freenet @ freenode to chat, discuss with us in the freenet devl mailing list and check the github-project.

Welcome to Freenet, where no one can watch you read.


NOTES

  1. Original article [text-only version / PDF version]
  2. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook / Gab / Google Plus / Liberty.me / Liberty Society / Minds / seen.life / VK / WordPress.com
    2. Extropy UnboundFacebook / WordPress.com
    3. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Google Plus / Twitter / WordPress.com
    4. New Mexico Libertarians Facebook group

Tuesday, 22 August 2017

Captain America and Spiderman, On the Rooftop

Filed under: Philosophy, Politics, Principles, Reading — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 10:52 PM (22:52)

Usually, the superhero genre doesn’t do much for me (mostly I wait for the movies to show up on TNT or FX[1]).

But when they[2] get it right, it’s pretty damn good.

I saved these scanned pages from a post made years ago on the calguns.net message board. They were scanned from The Amazing Spider-Man #537.

Considering the current socio-political climate, it seems as though the importance of standing up for one’s views, regardless of whether the whole world is against you, cannot be understated.


NOTES

  1. Why bother going to see them at the overpriced cineplex, with its overpriced snacks, uncomfortable seats, other moviegoers who are assholes, etc., when you can save a bundle by seeing it at home — you can have your food and drink of choice, start the movie whenever you want, pause or stop it whenever you want, and not have to put up with people you wouldn’t otherwise touch with a ten-parsec pole?

    Seriously, they can’t cut much from any of the Marvel or DC flicks — there’s no nudity, excessive profanity or graphic, gratuitous gore to speak of, and if they cut out the comic-book style violence, there wouldn’t be any plot left.

  2. In this case, J. Michael Straczynski of Babylon 5 fame, Ron Garney, Bill Reinhold, Matt Milla, Cory Petit, Michael O’Connor, and Alex Alonso.

Thursday, 20 July 2017

Quote of the Day for Thursday, 20 July 2017

Filed under: Economics, Politics, Principles, Quote of the Day, Reading — Tags: — mikewb1971 @ 4:07 AM (04:07)

It is my contention that this concept of spontaneous order is the central idea of the enlightenment, brought to a pinnacle nine years later by Adam Smith with his invisible hand and applied to life itself by Charles Darwin some decades later. If the English language can get along without a government, why do we so quickly assume that English society cannot organise itself?

To labour the point, today in London roughly 10 million people ate lunch. Working out just how much of each type of food to have available in the right places at the right time to ensure that this happened was a problem of mind-boggling complexity, made all the harder by the fact people made up their mind what to eat mostly at the last minute.

Who was in charge of this astonishing feat? Who is London’s lunch commissioner and why does he get so little credit? Why is this system not subsidised? How can it be so lightly regulated?

The protesters who gather to criticise free enterprise from time to time use Facebook and iPhones to arrange their protest, drink Starbucks and eat Pret, wear shirts and shoes, in some cases even use toothpaste and shampoo before setting out. They swim where they wish to in a sea of possibilities provided by free enterprise.

— Matt Ridley, Free Markets are Revolutionary, Liberating, and Democratic (Foundation for Economic Education [FEE])


Older Posts »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: