Stewart: Gingrich wants to leave earth ‘for a younger planet’
Active duty cop: ‘The war on drugs is a war on people’. By Stephen C. Webster
Washington Moves The World Closer To War
Paul Craig Roberts
Since my January 11 column http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/01/11/the-next-war-on-washingtons-agenda/ and the news alert posted on January 14 http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/01/14/news-alert/, more confirmation that Washington is moving the world toward a dangerous war has appeared. The Obama regime is using its Ministry of Propaganda, a.k.a., the American media, to spread the story that President Obama, Pentagon chief Panetta, and other high US officials are delivering strong warnings to Israel not to attack Iran.
For someone as familiar with Washington as I am, I recognize these reports for what they are. They are Br’er Rabbit telling Br’er Fox “please don’t throw me in the briar patch.”
If you don’t know the Uncle Remus stories, you have missed a lot. Br’er Rabbit was born and raised in the briar patch.
Since my January 11 column http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/01/11/the-next-war-on-washingtons-agenda/ and the news alert posted on January 14 http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/01/14/news-alert/, more confirmation that Washington is moving the world toward a dangerous war has appeared. The Obama regime is using its Ministry of Propaganda, a.k.a., the American media, to spread the story that President Obama, Pentagon chief Panetta, and other high US officials are delivering strong warnings to Israel not to attack Iran.
For someone as familiar with Washington as I am, I recognize these reports for what they are. They are Br’er Rabbit telling Br’er Fox “please don’t throw me in the briar patch.”
If you don’t know the Uncle Remus stories, you have missed a lot. Br’er Rabbit was born and raised in the briar patch.
How Ron Paul Could Win
In
the Soviet Union common criminals were punished less harshly and
received better treatment than political prisoners. A person who had
committed a violent crime had more rights than someone who expressed
criticism of the government and could be portrayed as having acted
against the government. We now have the same situation in the US.
Imagine an Occupied America
by Rep. Ron Paul
Imagine for a moment that somewhere in the middle
of Texas there was a large foreign military base, say Chinese or Russian. Imagine
that thousands of armed foreign troops were constantly patrolling American
streets in military vehicles. Imagine they were here under the auspices of
"keeping us safe" or "promoting democracy" or "protecting
their strategic interests."
Imagine that they operated outside of U.S. law, and that the Constitution did not apply to them. Imagine that every now and then they made mistakes or acted on bad information and accidentally killed or terrorized innocent Americans, including women and children, most of the time with little to no repercussions or consequences. Imagine that they set up checkpoints on our soil and routinely searched and ransacked entire neighborhoods of homes. Imagine if Americans were fearful of these foreign troops and overwhelmingly thought America would be better off without their presence.
Imagine that they operated outside of U.S. law, and that the Constitution did not apply to them. Imagine that every now and then they made mistakes or acted on bad information and accidentally killed or terrorized innocent Americans, including women and children, most of the time with little to no repercussions or consequences. Imagine that they set up checkpoints on our soil and routinely searched and ransacked entire neighborhoods of homes. Imagine if Americans were fearful of these foreign troops and overwhelmingly thought America would be better off without their presence.
Democratization: Indigenous Beats Imported
by Ivan Eland
In Iraq, even before U.S. forces had withdrawn, Shi’ite President Nouri al-Maliki was taking the country back toward dictatorship. Now that American forces are gone, with attempts to arrest the Sunni vice president and the detention of other prominent Sunnis, Maliki is accelerating the process. Meanwhile, the radical Sunni group al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia is stepping up attacks on Shi’ites, hoping to re-ignite the sectarian civil war of 2006 and 2007. With Iraq’s long history of rival ethno-sectarian groups in conflict, Sunni dictators, and no culture of political compromise needed for democracy, the prospects for an imposed democracy taking root were never great.
Why I Am An Anarchist
By Caleb Johnson
I suppose that our evaluation of others is based, not so much on who they are as themselves, but rather on the face that they present to the world, and thus it is that often others are surprised when they learn that I am an anarchist. And I suppose that I can empathize with the initial confusion, for I myself only gradually came to accept the label of `anarchist' for many of the same reasons.
Now, I can only imagine what gruesome scenario enters the mind of each person as he envisions just what, exactly, anarchy might mean for the world, but I know what it used to mean to me. The mental picture that I formed of the anarchist was of an angry young man throwing a homemade bomb. The society he hoped for could only be one of chaos and disorder, where organized bands of thugs plundered with abandon and citizens huddled in the darkness of their homes, shivering for fear and praying for some escape back to civility and civilization. And this melancholy picture, of course, is as offensive to me as it is to you, being as I am a peaceful person, more at home sipping tea in a coffeeshop than I am burning effigies, and more inclined to vacation at a tropical paradise than to the heart of Somalia.
I suppose that our evaluation of others is based, not so much on who they are as themselves, but rather on the face that they present to the world, and thus it is that often others are surprised when they learn that I am an anarchist. And I suppose that I can empathize with the initial confusion, for I myself only gradually came to accept the label of `anarchist' for many of the same reasons.
Now, I can only imagine what gruesome scenario enters the mind of each person as he envisions just what, exactly, anarchy might mean for the world, but I know what it used to mean to me. The mental picture that I formed of the anarchist was of an angry young man throwing a homemade bomb. The society he hoped for could only be one of chaos and disorder, where organized bands of thugs plundered with abandon and citizens huddled in the darkness of their homes, shivering for fear and praying for some escape back to civility and civilization. And this melancholy picture, of course, is as offensive to me as it is to you, being as I am a peaceful person, more at home sipping tea in a coffeeshop than I am burning effigies, and more inclined to vacation at a tropical paradise than to the heart of Somalia.
Libertarianism through Thick and Thin
To what extent should libertarians concern themselves with social
commitments, practices, projects or movements that seek social outcomes
beyond, or other than, the standard libertarian commitment to expanding
the scope of freedom from government coercion?
Clearly, a consistent and principled libertarian cannot support efforts or beliefs that are contrary to libertarian principles—such as efforts to engineer social outcomes by means of government intervention. But if coercive laws have been taken off the table, what should libertarians say about other religious, philosophical, social, or cultural commitments that pursue their ends through non-coercive means, such as targeted moral agitation, mass education, artistic or literary propaganda, charity, mutual aid, public praise, ridicule, social ostracism, targeted boycotts, social investing, slow-downs and strikes in a particular shop, general strikes, or other forms of solidarity and coordinated action? Which social movements should they oppose, which should they support, and towards which should they counsel indifference? And how do we tell the difference?
Clearly, a consistent and principled libertarian cannot support efforts or beliefs that are contrary to libertarian principles—such as efforts to engineer social outcomes by means of government intervention. But if coercive laws have been taken off the table, what should libertarians say about other religious, philosophical, social, or cultural commitments that pursue their ends through non-coercive means, such as targeted moral agitation, mass education, artistic or literary propaganda, charity, mutual aid, public praise, ridicule, social ostracism, targeted boycotts, social investing, slow-downs and strikes in a particular shop, general strikes, or other forms of solidarity and coordinated action? Which social movements should they oppose, which should they support, and towards which should they counsel indifference? And how do we tell the difference?
Liberty, Equality, Solidarity: Toward a Dialectical Anarchism
It’s March 2010. It has now been two years since my essay "Liberty,
Equality, Solidarity" appeared in Roderick and Tibor’s
Anarchism/Minarchism anthology. Which means that those of you who
recently ordered now have a shipment in the mail, which should arrive
within the next few days. And it also means I can now do this. Enjoy!
Liberty, Equality, Solidarity: Toward a Dialectical Anarchism
Charles Johnson (2006/2008)
Reprinted with permission of the Publishers from "Liberty, Equality,
Solidarity: Toward a Dialectical Anarchism" in Anarchism/Minarchism, ed.
Roderick T. Long and Tibor R. Machan (Ashgate, 2008). pp. 155-188. If
you reprint this article, please retain this attribution.
The purpose of this essay is political revolution. And I don’t mean a
“revolution” in libertarian political theory, or a revolutionary new
political strategy, or the kind of “revolution” that consists in
electing a cadre of new and better politicians to the existing seats of
power. When I say a “revolution,” I mean the real thing: I hope that
this essay will contribute to the overthrow of the United States
government, and indeed all governments everywhere in the world. You
might think that the argument of an academic essay is a pretty slender
reed to lean on; but then, every revolution has to start somewhere, and
in any case what I have in mind may be somewhat different from what you
imagine. For now, it will be enough to say that I intend to give you
some reasons to become an individualist anarchist,[1] and undermine some
of the arguments for preferring minimalist government to anarchy. In
the process, I will argue that the form of anarchism I defend is best
understood from what Chris Sciabarra has described as a dialectical
orientation in social theory,[2] as part of a larger effort to
understand and to challenge interlocking, mutually reinforcing systems
of oppression, of which statism is an integral part—but only one part
among others. Not only is libertarianism part of a radical politics of
human liberation, it is in fact the natural companion of revolutionary
Leftism and radical feminism.
Common Property in Free Market Anarchism: A Missing Link
Two types of common property could exist in a free market anarchist society. The first is when individuals voluntarily and purposely form some group, party, marriage unit, or company where property is held in common. This is considered acceptable to those who use the term private property anarchism, and it could still be called a type of private property.
Dictates to the Union
Column by Emmett Harris.
The other night, President Obama
continued the modern tradition whereby the current White House denizen
annually assaults the airwaves with a stream of teleprompter words that rival Lunesta in their ability to induce drowsiness. I’m referring, of course, to the State of the Union Address.
It was a long, boring, and
typically dangerous speech. It was a speech boasting of spending cuts
promised in the future balanced against spending increases delivered in
the past and intended for the future. One side of the ledger is pure
fantasy, an empty promise designed to present an air of responsibility
to an utterly irresponsible
institution. The one truth that threads its way throughout the oration
is power, power wielded by and concentrated in the federal government
generally and the presidency specifically. Whether one views this as
good or bad, Obama promised much more of the same.
Free Market Anarchism
Anarchism,
as defined by the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, is: 'a political
theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and
undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and
free association of individuals and groups.' Wikipedia, a free online
encyclopedia, has an excellent section on anarchism, and all its derivative flavors. From Wikipedia we find: 'Anarchism
is a generic term describing various political philosophies and social
movements that advocate the elimination of the state. These philosophies
use anarchy to mean a society based on voluntary
cooperation of free individuals.' It is interesting to note that both
definitions stress that anarchism is a society based on voluntary
cooperation of individuals.
Fast and Furious stinks
Gun-smuggling scheme another reason to distrust government
Illustration by John Camejo for The Washington Times Romney’s taxes are good news for America
IRS forms present a hardworking, disciplined, charitable candidate
Illustration: Romney taxesObama's Justices vs. Obama
Obama has appointed to the Supreme Court people who don't entirely share his taste for aggressive statism.
Big Brother Is Now Your Diet Coach
Should the government be watching what you eat?
A new federal effort called SuperTracker may
sound like a program to keep extremely close tabs on suspected
terrorists or other enemies of the state, but it isn’t—unless those
enemies also happen to be healthy-minded consumers intent on
dropping a few pounds.A product of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP ), SuperTracker is an online tool located at choosemyplate.gov that helps users set and maintain dietary goals. Create a user profile at the site, and you can track the calories you consume each day, record your daily physical activities, set weight management goals, and see how close you come to eating the USDA’s recommended daily allowance of dark green vegetables. SuperTracker, an expanded version of previous tools called the MyPyramid Tracker and the MyPyramid Menu Planner, debuted in December 2011. In its first month, it reportedly attracted more than 700,000 registered users. Any day now, then, we should expect to see either the end of the obesity epidemic or SuperDuperTracker, an even more intrusive and hands-on government effort to engineer our behavior. If you’re a betting man, bet on the latter.
Human Martians
The people who settle the Red Planet may not look like us.
To understand why genetic engineering is the only
way humanity can conquer Mars and the rest of the solar system,
consider what the current version of Homo sapiens will
have to endure on a trip to the Red Planet. Any crew dispatched on
the 18-to-30-month mission to Mars will face highly elevated risks
of cancer, tissue degradation, bone density loss, brain damage,
pharmaceutical spoilage, and other health threats.
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario