Congressman Assaults Student on Washington Sidewalk

Police Statism, The Left, The Right, Vulgar Politics
By / / 2 minutes of reading
Share

Apropos Jacob Huebert’s excellent post a few days ago on the time Before We Worshipped Presidents, our lesser rulers are getting increasingly used to their special, above-the-law status as well. Watch how Democratic Congressman Bob Etheridge responds to being peacefully asked a simple question by a well-dressed student on a public street:

Congressman Etheridge thinks he can interrogate and assault someone simply for having the temerity to ask him a question in public, apparently without fear of retaliation or legal consequences, despite being recorded. He has a right to know who the student is? I don’t think so. He’s not police. I don’t think even a police officer would have cause under positive law to demand identification and assault the student simply for video recording and asking a question in public. In any case, their authority is illegitimate and what we have here clearly is assault even under current positive law.

What’s more disturbing is that this incident is indicative of just how much our petty tyrants view themselves as being above us and the law — though I suppose assaulting one person on the street is an improvement over assaulting millions through his legislative acts; if only he and his fellow control-freaks would cease the latter, the world would be a much better place and their private crime manageable.

…

Congressman Assaults Student on Washington SidewalkRead More »

Congressman Assaults Student on Washington Sidewalk Read Post »

Was it worth it?

Democracy, Education, Finance, Vulgar Politics
By / / 3 Comments / 2 minutes of reading
Share

Well, as predicted (by me), in pursuit of one of Connecticut’s US Senate seats, Peter Schiff wasted a lot of time and money, and was forced to refrain from making several television appearances on financial news programs (due to campaign laws). He placed an embarrassing third:

Former professional wrestling maven Linda McMahon capped an improbable entry into politics Friday night when she captured the Republican Party endorsement for the U.S. Senate during a raucous Republican convention at the Connecticut Convention Center.

McMahon edged former U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons after dozens of delegates switched their votes at the conclusion of the first ballot. She received 737 votes to 632 for Simmons and 44 for economist Peter Schiff.

…

Was it worth it?Read More »

Was it worth it? Read Post »

When the “Gotcha” Moment Disappoints

Anti-Statism, Democracy
By / / 3 Comments / 5 minutes of reading
Share

One of my goals when debating the truth of libertarian political philosophy is getting my opponent to realize that he is an advocate of aggression. That is, I want my opponent to realize that his policies necessarily require that the State not only threaten innocent people with physical violence but also that State agents must beat, jail, and even kill those who are unwilling to obey State dictates. My hope is that my opponent will see the wanton immorality of his position and rethink his political philosophy. The reason I think that such recognition will lead to an epiphany is because the people I debate claim to be peaceful people who abhor violence. In my mind, I imagine my opponent realizing that he cannot claim to value peace and abhor violence while defending an institution that is inherently aggressive and violent. This moral contradiction would lead him to see the error of his ways and instantly renounce violence. He then reads Mises.org and LewRockwell.com regularly and begins the long process of learning true history and true economics. But this has yet to happen in my experience.

Instead some of my opponents cling to the notion that we must have a monopoly of violence to prevent even more violence. In one recent debate my opponent conceded that the State does indeed reduce material wealth, but he was fine with this because the State also reduces wealth inequality. Why income inequality should be a moral concern was not addressed in this debate. But what really disappointed me in this exchange was that my opponent also claimed to value peace and nonviolence as I do. This is simply false; libertarians are the only people who value peace and nonviolence. We are the only ones who apply the same moral standards to both private and government actors. Theft is theft; murder is murder; fraud is fraud. It does not matter if the thief is a petty-pickpocket or an IRS agent. If both parties did not consent to the exchange, this is theft. …

When the “Gotcha” Moment DisappointsRead More »

When the “Gotcha” Moment Disappoints Read Post »

Re: Rekindling my hatred for Republicans

Anti-Statism, Drug Policy, The Left, The Right
By / / 2 minutes of reading
Share
"Excellent..."

The War on Drugs is one of the most  insidious, racist policies I can imagine, Rob. It’s the allegedly “unintended” consequences which create the kind of havoc in the black community that the staunchest racists could never have accomplished with a free hand to terrorize blacks. The only other policy nearly as destructive to blacks is the government “school” system. And consider that taken together, these policies create a brutal one-two punch on black males. By operating a “school” system which makes it virtually impossible for urban black males to become educated, the most entrepreneurial of that demographic are wiped out in the drug war, either via murder at the hands of fellow black entrepreneurs, murder at the hands of state agents enforcing the prohibition on drugs, or imprisonment in the state’s torture-and-rape institutions. These are the guys who, in a world without the nanny-police state, would be the risk-takers, starting businesses and peacefully satisfying consumers’ wants. Racists must love seeing them killed or imprisoned! I suppose those urban black males with a spectacular talent in sports or the arts, as well as those who can rap well, have a shot of escaping the reservations called “housing projects” blacks have been gathered into by government over the last few generations, but for the average urban black male, joining the military and going to war is probably less stressful than just trying to survive.

Really, I can visualize the long-dead Southern slave-masters  looking up from Hell, tapping their fingers together in glee a la Montgomery Burns from The Simpsons.

Re: Rekindling my hatred for Republicans Read Post »

Rekindling my hatred for Republicans

Anti-Statism, Drug Policy, The Left, The Right
By / / 3 Comments / 2 minutes of reading
Share

I’d let go of the hatred of Republicans for a while. I’d transferred most of the acrimony to Democrats, since Democratic policies have had the most devastating effects on my friends and family. Welfare has been incredibly destructive to blacks in America. The steady erosion of the family, the obsolescence of men within many black communities, and the reliance on government solutions to problems are things which I specifically associate with the programs supported by Democrats, and the popular support of the Democratic Party by blacks.

But just when I think I can forget about the Republicans, a reminder came to me, courtesy of The History Channel. During a discussion on cocaine, Nixon’s initiation of the war on drugs, and Reagan’s escalation of that policy were particularly highlighted. Looking at the ruin visited upon black communities, especially ones in urban areas, across the country, I found the old hatreds easy to resurrect. In my opinion, the war on drugs is the most destructive set of laws since slavery. Worse, in fact, than Jim Crow, since at least with Jim Crow laws, a black person could escape within the United States by going north. It is difficult to escape the war on drugs, even outside of the US.

Of course, the war on drugs cannot be blamed purely on Republicans. Democrats have waged the war on drugs very fiercely in their own right, yet few, if any, of the so-called black leaders who are commonly trotted out on various television programs bother to ever say anything negative about these policies. Those “leaders” are swift to take offense for all blacks for the smallest perceived slight or appearance of unfairness, yet they rarely attack the most savagely unfair laws on the books, drug laws. Indeed, looking at the issue without bias should lead any reasonable person to the conclusion that Barack Obama, due to his continued prosecution of the drug war, is the latest in a long line of racist presidents.

Rekindling my hatred for Republicans Read Post »

Scroll to Top