It would appear that the “Crazy Years” predicted
by Robert A. Heinlein have arrived.
Send Letters to email@example.com
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publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication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!]
Over and over Again
I do this twice a year. Doing it a little differently this time.
This s possibly one of the most sublime passages in the English language: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Texas, and possibly other states, require that the week of Constitution Day (17 Sept.) students demonstrate that they can recite the part in bold face by memory. Statists love it. Left or right, doesn’t matter. This is an explanation of why we owe loyalty to the state. However, the Declaration of Independence was not a call to obedience, it was an explanation of why the people should rebel against a tyrant and a call to do so. It was about the part in italics.
The American History teachers where I work make sure their students learn that phrase. I am proud of them. Make sure your sons and daughters learn this part too, the one tyrants and would be tyrants hate.
Was that worth reading?
Then why not:
California has literally gone to pot!
Stumbled across this in my twitter feed. This is probably the best and worst example of unintended consequences from the War on Drugs I’ve ever seen. Usually it’s in the form of gang violence, militarization of the police, property forfeitures, infringements on Liberty and invasion of privacy—now, its become an environmental disaster.
California has literally gone to pot! It sounds horrible the way it is causing animals to die and putting the health and lives of local people at risk. And if you are a pot smoker you have to wonder: if it’s contaminating the watersheds and killing the drug sniffing dogs that come in contact with the plants—what could happen if you inhale it?!?
Re: “State Censorship, Corporate Censorship: A Libertarian View” by Sean Gabb
Sean Gabb makes some good points, but the outlook seems poor. If state and corporation are “two cheeks of the same arse”, then how do you expect state involvement to change the picture?
People tend to believe that government is fair, or at least makes a show of being so. They naturally expect some even-handedness when the state deals with individuals. The arguments Sean makes would have at least some small effect on government institutions. But how can you expect fairness arguments to work in corporations? Nobody expects them to be fair or evenhanded.
Is regulation libertarian? Is policing of speech libertarian?
The largest problem with Sean’s recipe is that it promises a lot of effort with little prospect for gain.
A better bet would be to hit those corporations in their pocketbooks. You don’t need government for that. Just cancel your twitter account, for example. Help work on a boycott movement.
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!)