Down With Power Audiobook!

L. Neil Smith's THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 890, September 18, 2016

Deplorable! Deplorable! Deplorable!

Previous Previous          Table of Contents Contents          Next Next

Letters to the Editor

Bookmark and Share

Send Letters to editor@ncc-1776.org
Note: All letters to this address will be considered for
publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication


[Letters to the editor are welcome on any and all subjects. Sign your letter in the text body with your name and e-mail address as you wish them to appear, otherwise we will use the information in the "From:" header!]


Letter from Bryan Potratz

Letter from Paul Bonneau

Letter from A.X. Perez

Letter from T.J. Mason

Another Letter from Paul Bonneau



Letter from Bryan Potratz

RE: “I actually think that there is some minimum IQ to have a free society, and that explains why so many people aren't libetarians—that ol' Zero Agression Principle is just too hard to comprehend for yer average person (who's IQ runs about 90 these days I've heard). Just not smart enough to be free! Golly!” [last issue's Editor's Remarks]

Look at it this way (as expressed by Aaron Clarey in Curse of the High IQ)

Most IQ scoring uses a SD of 15 on the bell curve, so:

If your IQ is 1 SD above the Mean (i.e. 115+ vs. 100) your ability to relate to Joe Average (IQ 100) is the same as his ability to relate to someone with an IQ of 85.

If your IQ is 2 SDs above the Mean (i.e. 130+ vs. 100) your ability to relate to Joe Average (IQ 100) is the same as his ability to relate to someone with an IQ of 70.

(3 SDs, 145 is to 100 as 100 is to 55… and so on…

Under current definitions, an IQ of 70 is borderline/mild retardation and less than 2% of the population, just as an IQ of 130+ gets you into Mensa and is also less than 2% of the population.

So… no wonder the Kardashian Klub can’t grok TANSSTAAFL, much less ZAP.

Bryan Potratz
bpotratz@msn.com


Was that worth reading?
Then why not:


payment type

Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author

Back to the top


Letter from Paul Bonneau

Re: “Defensive Voting” by Bill St. Clair

Bill writes, “I decided that I need to practice defensive voting. I registered online today, and I plan to vote republican across the ticket in November. Not that I like the republicans.”

As I noted somewhere in those articles, I consider “defensive voting” to be voting against things like a ballot measure to hike taxes. In almost no case does voting for a human being qualify as defensive, and voting for a party certainly is not. I attempted to make an exception to this rule with Trump, and finally came to the conclusion that there was not an exception. So no, Bill, that is not defensive voting. That is just ordinary voting.

Paul Bonneau
pjb1@protonmail.ch

Sent from ProtonMail, encrypted email based in Switzerland.


Was that worth reading?
Then why not:


payment type

Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author

Back to the top


Letter from A.X. Perez

Forgotten Issues

With all the fuss made over Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton it is easy to forget that 435 elections to the House of Representatives are going on as well as 34 seats in the Senate up for grabs. If you are a voter (some people reading this believe that voting is an endorsement of “the system” and therefor do not vote) remember to get out and vote. I recommend voting against the Democrats as basically that Party’s platform supports every gun control proposal libertarians oppose. Of course, if you are not a single issue voter, educate yourself on the two Parties’ platforms and vote against the Party you find most offensive (or for the Party you find most attractive if there is one).

Also remember that election to state and local offices occur this 8 November. There will also be a number of initiatives, referenda, amendments to state constitutions, bond proposals, and taxes up for vote. Right now the biggest fights over gun control, legalization of cannabis, and education issues are at the local and state level.

Recently some people observing the success of Brexit and Donald Trump have suggested restricting the right to vote to people “smart” enough to use it, i.e, people who would have voted against both. As deplorable as some of the things majorities have voted for are, limiting the right to vote to members of a self- important elites is worse. Conversely, surrendering the ballot box to this ilk by not going to vote does not strike me as a good idea.

A.X. Perez
perez180ehs@hotmail.com


Was that worth reading?
Then why not:


payment type

Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author

Back to the top


Letter from T.J. Mason

Lessons from San Bernardino Terror Attack

News I hope you never have the opportunity to use-but should be aware of:

Lessons from San Bernardino Terror Attack

Denial of the right to keep and bear arms is the human rights violation that makes all other human rights violations possible.

TJ Mason
tjmason@oneamericanvoice.me


Was that worth reading?
Then why not:


payment type

Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author

Back to the top


Another Letter from Paul Bonneau

Re: “Not All Ideas are Created Equal” by Sean Gangol

Sean writes, “When it comes to creationism and the nonsense that statists constantly peddle to the public, these things are believed by a higher percentage of people, which makes them more dangerous. By not countering these ideas, we are allowing our opponents to have the last word. We need to counter these ideas, even if it requires using mockery and ridicule.”

No we don’t. The world will not come to an end if some people, even a majority, think the Earth started back in 4004 BC.

It’s bad strategy to try to counter bad ideas, besides being physically impossible (there are just too many of them). What we should put our time and money into is making statists defend their coercion of us. If they don’t coerce us, then their wrong thinking is really none of our business.

Besides, defending coercion is actually pretty hard to do. It makes life difficult for the aggressors.

It’s more effective to let people find truth on their own. Bottom-up learning, that’s the ticket. No, the model of us pouring knowledge into the heads of the benighted, is not going to work. Sorry...

Here’s an article I wrote about it.

Sean, ease up on people. You’ll like them better, and they’ll like you better. You’ll like yourself better too...

Paul Bonneau
pjb1@protonmail.ch

Sent from ProtonMail, encrypted email based in Switzerland.


Was that worth reading?
Then why not:


payment type

Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author

Back to the top


This site may receive compensation if a product is purchased
through one of our partner or affiliate referral links. You
already know that, of course, but this is part of the FTC Disclosure
Policy found here. (Warning: this is a 2,359,896-byte 53-page PDF file!)

TLE AFFILIATE

Rational Review
Rational Review

Rational Review News Digest
Rational Review News Digest


Previous Previous          Table of Contents Contents          Next Next

Big Head Press