Hogan Zeroes

2006-12-16T20:46:00.000-05:00

Not Dead Yet

Sorry to be stale, but i can be read here and at this subblog here at Aqoul.

The title of this entry will be hilariously ironic if I am actually dead when you read it. Too bad I'll be missing the laugh.

That said, the warbloggers and Ann Coulter shut up and went home

2006-04-01T19:49:00.000-05:00

Warbloggers Can Go Home Now, and Take Ann Coulter too.

Quote of the day:

We had consensus [on Afghanistan]. Both sides of the aisle in Congress and the entire nation agreed that al-Qaeda had to be kept from continuing its attacks.

Sadly . . . we have squandered our opportunity to face terrorism with unified and coherent action. The right's neocons orchestrated a war with Iraq that has destroyed national consensus and they are culpable for politicizing the individual soldier by repeatedly sending the message that to criticize policy equates attacking the soldier. . . .

-- Geoffrey Lambert, Maj Gen.-Ret., U.S. Army; Commander, Army Special Forces Command (Airborne), 2001 to 2003.

2006-01-14T19:36:00.000-05:00

Am I the Only One Catching the Irony here?

Kate Michelman, the longtime leader of NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League), the main voice of "pro-choice" advocacy on abortion, is feted with these words from Madeleine Albright in a Washington Post tribute:

[Albright] and others testified to Michelman's energy and focus.... Albright told everyone that Michelman had provided "a voice for those who didn't have a voice and a brain for those who didn't have a brain."

I suspect alot of likeminded folks of theirs still won't pick up on the irony, even if it's directly pointed out.

UPDATE: I should have checked...I am, it appears, not the only one to notice.

2006-01-13T06:34:00.000-05:00

Nation-Building, the Bureaucracy

Justin Logan and Chris Preble of the CATO Institute take on the idea of the new State Deparment Colonial Office, excuse me Nation-Building office, here. A bit long and wonkish as are think-tank pieces, but full of gems.

2005-12-22T13:43:00.000-05:00

What Are the Limits on Executive Power, Anyway?

This is a serious law school-type hypothetical.

A journalist in a foreign, but not officially hostile, Middle Eastern country (not Iraq, Syria, Iran), (e.g. Egypt, Jordan), writes an article vociferously attacking the President and US foreign policy. The President decides the journalist should be killed as it may harm alliances or the war on terror.

A) He authorizes private friends to make the hit.
B) He orders the military to do the hit.

Lawful or no? Write on only one side of page in your bluebook.

Assume no other persons or parties will be injured in the assassination strike by either of the above means.

2005-12-20T14:01:00.000-05:00

Evolving Jurisprudence

This decision sort of blows. The one just handed down overturning the Dover, Pennsylvania school board requirement for teaching "intelligent design" (ID) as an alternative to the theory of evolution.

The decision focuses too much on the Establishment clause and on the motives and history of the ID movement (a dangerous area) as a fundamentalist movement. It is not, as it should be, centrally about the scientific merit of the theory.

Frankly, if the plaintiffs could have done it, they should have had the School Board's order litigated according to the science evidence standard of federal courts - the Daubert case. (Perhaps they could have challenged each ID expert's admissibility.) That would have required it to be shown that ID was a theory with widespread peer review support, acceptance in the scientific community, with demonstrated testing etc.

In a way, the judge did apply that reasoning in determining ID not to be science, but he did so without citing Daubert which he should have.

And he should have started and stopped with that.

The School Board would have lost in a slam-dunk with Daubert applied alone....

Instead the court is probing motives behind legislation and political movements, a very very dangerous area for a free and democratic society, but one that pleases the reflexive anti-fundamentalists.

Don't overturn this, but distinguish, narrow, and modify it.

2005-12-20T09:29:00.000-05:00

Stumbling Democratization Efforts in Yemen

A nice commentary and original story link on the stumbling efforts of foreign aid democratization in Yemen.

2005-12-17T17:07:00.000-05:00

What about the algebra teachers?

Alot of buzz about taking Christ out of Christmas, but I believe there are a few furious algebra teachers mad about the taking of the X out of Xmas.

Give the Provos A Chance

2005-12-07T13:04:00.000-05:00

Give Provos A Chance: The 25-Year Dead John Lennon . . .

. . . imagines some of the world, not quite living as one.

Some less-remembered lyrics from Lennon's "Sunday, Bloody Sunday", recorded a year or so after "Imagine" and not too long after "Give Peace A Chance". (And no, he didn't mean these words ironically):

______

They've got a lot to learn
Internment is no answer
It's those mother's turn
to burn!

Sunday bloody sunday
Bloody sunday's the day

You anglo pigs and scotties
Sent to colonize the north
You wave your bloody
Union Jacks
And you know what it's worth!
How dare you hold on to ransom
A people proud and free
Keep ireland for the irish
Put the english back to sea!

____________

-- John Lennon, "Sunday, Bloody Sunday"

Perhaps he and Yoko were undergoing tribal scream therapy.

Anyway, what else to expect from a guy who turned the Communist Manifesto into a piano sing-a-long ("Imagine")?

Nevertheless, he could still consistently manage some rather good tunes and memorable lyrics. So Rest in Peace, John Lennon, even if you were not quite the Man of Peace the fans like to celebrate.

2005-11-11T17:44:00.000-05:00

Leviathan: FOUND!

Attention libertarians. It wasn't just Hobbes or the Bible. The Leviathan has been found. No word on its social programs or military policy, though.

2005-10-25T00:22:00.000-04:00

Rosa Parks RIP

I may have personally elicited the last tribute to Rosa Parks before her death in the Washington Post. The online link there lacks the hardcopy version's large photo of Ms. Parks in jail.

2005-10-08T17:31:00.000-04:00

On Ethics and Legality

Me in the Washington Post, Saturday.

2005-09-28T01:37:00.000-04:00

March, My Words

It turns out I was wrong (see two posts down) in specifics but not wholly wrong in general about the anti-Iraq war march in Washington last Saturday. The noxious pro-Palestinian signs were not there, thank goodness. There was a hackneyed "X dies/Y lies" rhyme but that's to be expected. And the new "Make levees not war" is clever. And not too much pro-Chavez stuff. On the other hand, openly pro-Communist stuff (explicitly so) floated about; a non-ANSWER type organizer later bemoaned to me that every type had to show up.

I was a fellow-traveler (of the march not Communism). For a few minutes downtown I walked alongside the demonstrators, in agreement with their goals on Iraq but not their world view. I walked past the counterprotesters who were too busy baiting the marchers for a serious discussion. A person or two among the counterprotestors was painted and decked out in red white and blue in a way that would be as offensive as flag-burning when done by the other side.

But here's what struck me. The counterprotestors, the mostly normal-looking ones (which were most of them), had American flags, while precious few American flags were in the anti-war march. For those of us who may have non-conformist opinions but conventional political esthetics, and even an old-fashioned patriotism, stuff like that is very noticeable.

More important was the fact that ultimately this was not an anti-Iraq rally or even an anti-war rally. It was just an anti-Bush rally, with Iraq as the accusation du jour. One cannot help but think that for many demonstrators their real problem with the war is not the American life, limb or resources lost, or the Iraqi lives destroyed and disrupted, or the falsehoods advanced to justify it, but simply that all that carnage was initiated by the loathed personage of George W Bush. And looking at the demonstrators one could feel that, for at least a great many, they hate Bush primarily because he simply reminds them of some jock/religious-devotee/fratboy/whiteguy/rich-kid who made them feel like rejects for being a hippie/woman/gay/minority/nerd/working-class-person, etc. And that's a dumb reason and way to fight a dumb war.

UPDATE, SORT OF:

Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post, in a column I have only in hard copy, shows what I mean in a way. He harangues the White House for not taking note of the import of the antiwar movement, and compares the current administration to the White House of Johnson failing in Vietnam to notice the protest songs. Then Robinson adds "did everybody in this administration spend the whole Vietnam era listening to Pat Boone or whatever it was they grooved to in the frat houses?"

And did Mr. Robinson spend the '60s in an Afro listening to James Brown in the 'hood?

Maybe there could be a stereotype competition. Sheesh.

2005-09-23T19:14:00.000-04:00

Second Amendment to Courts: You like me, you really like me!

This is just supercool.

2005-09-22T17:40:00.000-04:00

Slogan Zeros: Predicted Silly Antiwar Demonstration Themes

On Saturday, large numbers of protestors will show up in D.C. and around the country to protest the Iraq War. (A few among them will throw in other wars to protest as well.) As to Iraq, my sympathies are there to the extent that I consider the Iraq Attack one our Greatest National Boo-Boos Ever. And some of the folks involved and participating in Saturday's events are those I know, respect, like, or love.

Still, with groups like ANSWER involved you know it’s going to get really silly. And fast. It’ll quickly devolve into an assemblage of largely militant secular leftists convinced with all their hearts that while there is no God, George W. Bush is nevertheless the Antichrist.

The way to tell the silliness is the slogans. I predict the need-to-be-retired-yesterday themes laid out below will be out and about. They will appear and be notable as chants, signs, and speech themes. (Can anyone suggest others to add? But I don’t want to hear from the pro-war folks for whom everything about the demonstration is bad.)

Silly slogans and themes:

No blood for oil. Retire this one please. Sure oil’s a central consideration in Mideast geopolitics (as it should be) but the stale Leninist/degraded Marxist view – rich people start wars to steal foreign wealth -- is sooooooooo early 20th Century. Discretionary wars actually serve to satiate popular revenge sentiment, economically serve to meet more immediate needs of a military-industrial complex and mass news media, and also help implement ideological visions of superiority. Greed is often central but the greed will be for the gainful employment of the glib political class and professional military suppliers, and may not be for local resources primarily. To assume so is actually bad Marxism, even. (As if it mattered.)

And sometimes a war can be necessary and forced upon one too, even if profitable to some. (Iraq isn’t necessary or forced on us, however).

X lied, Y died. Ok they rhyme. On aesthetic grounds this has to go.

Hey hey, ho ho, occupation’s got to go. Same thing: aesthetic grounds.

Anything with “corporate” in it. “Corporate” has become the softer progressive left’s euphemized garble for the old socialist-Communist epithet “capitalist” (which, folks, is actually kind of a good thing, capitalism). Yes evil “corporate” interests help drive wars, but guess what? Evil doesn’t become better if done by a limited liability partnership, or a sole proprietorship. Most important, it takes a government, not a capitalist, to make wars happen. And a thought: what or who is it that people bring up when they rave about “corporate” pro-war media? Well, Rupert Murdoch, mainly. But he as far as I can tell, is not a corporation but an individual. And who often brings up this corporate evil? Well, groups like Ramsey Clark’s International Action Center, to which ANSWER is associated, and which is apparently funded by a … corporation (and a tax deductible one too!)

Sharon = Hitler OR [Star of David] = [Swastika]. From the pro-Palestinian crowd. I recall an earlier antiwar demonstration in DC in 2003 where there were chants of “death to Sharon” in the middle of this antiwar(!) rally, not to mention Arabic chants about bombing Tel Aviv (few knew this if they weren't Arabic speakers or, in my case, around an Arabic speaker). Now, while I think the Israeli record is far worse than Israel’s knee-jerk fan club will concede, and worse than conventional wisdom appreciates, such noxious and counterproductive sloganeering is basically pro-Palestinians just getting their rhetorical rocks off by offensively and inarticulately trying to say “F.U. Jews and pro-Israelis for bringing up the Holocaust when we state our case.”

Free Mumia. Mumia Abu-Jamal, the apparent cop-killer who got convicted on possibly less-than-reasonable doubt evidence will be lionized. Good Lord, why?

NEW! A Chavez slogan. Something obscenely nice may be said about the Venezuelan generalissimo and Castro-to-be Hugo Chavez.

NEW! Something about Katrina being a sign of racism. I’m kind of sympathetic to the charge of government and Administration serious blundering in regard to the Katrina plans and even to how Iraq detracted from the resources of responsible protection. But the spirit of Kayne West will probably prevail and the whole mess will be blamed on a fantasy regarding George W. Bush’s alleged racism.

2005-09-10T17:41:00.000-04:00

Ways Government Can Suck

Please get it, non-libertarian people.

The reason we libertarians don't want uninhibited government is that we fear unshackled power. Being a government agent is no immunity to human nature, it just allows the worst aspects to be practiced with impunity. It doesn't matter if it's George Bush or John Kerry or Hillary Clinton.

From Yahoo news (via Radley Balko):

A group of female hurricane survivors were told to show their breasts if they wanted to be rescued, a British holidaymaker has revealed.Ged Scott watched as American rescuers turned their boat around and sped off when the the women refused.

(Second Amendment sidelight: That's the dis-armers talking to the dis-armees, by the way.)

OTOH, the reports of volunteer rescue workers being given sexual harrassment training at FEMA look less looney now.

2005-09-05T21:16:00.000-04:00

Dept. of Closing the Barn Door After....

Good news, two weeks too late; and bad news, never timely . . . .

"Repairs on New Orleans Levee Completed

By DOUG SIMPSON, AP

NEW ORLEANS (Sept. 5) - A week after Hurricane Katrina, engineers plugged the levee break that swamped much of the city and floodwaters began to recede, but along with the good news came the mayor's direst prediction yet: As many as 10,000 dead."

2005-09-02T11:00:00.000-04:00

Lileks explains the wrong error

James Lileks writes to explain why he wrongly slammed the French for not doing anything in regard to the Katrina hurricane damage in New Orleans. Lileks reports that he had acted . . .

"without doing any research, since I was in a black mood and disinclined to back anything up."

Wait a minute, isn't that more likely a superb explanation of the politics of the entire recent invasion of Iraq?

moyers & Hurricane

2005-09-01T08:32:00.000-04:00

Talking New Orleans and Hurricanes in 2002

Check this out, the full text is even more detailed and prescient --

From Bill Moyers show in 2002

DANIEL ZWERDLING: We've tried to find scientists who'd say that these predictions of doom could never really come true and we haven't been able to find them. The main debate seems to be, when the country is facing different kinds of threats, which ones should get the most attention? The federal government has been cutting money from hurricane protection projects. Partly to pay for the war against terrorists.

DANIEL ZWERDLING:Do you think that the President of the United States and Congress understand that people like you and the scientists studying this think the city of New Orleans could very possibly disappear?

WALTER MAESTRI:I think they know that, I think that they've been told that. I don't know that anybody, though, psychologically, you know has come to grips with that as-- as a-- a potential real situation. Just like none of us could possibly come to grips with the loss of the World Trade Center. And it's still hard for me to envision that it's gone. You know and it's impossible for someone like me to think that the French Quarter of New Orleans could be gone.

. . .

JAY COMBE: I think of a terrible disaster. I think of 100,000, and that's just my guess. I think that there's a terrible lack of perception. The last serious hurricane we had here was in 1965. That's close to 40 years ago.

So, we've dodged bullets three times since Betsy and I'm not sure we can keep counting on the hurricane changing its mind and going someplace else.

DANIEL ZWERDLING: Stories about disasters in America usually end on an optimistic note. People rebound. The nation rebuilds. Life gradually gets back to normal. But officials in Louisiana are facing another possibility: If a monster storm strikes New Orleans, this city might never come back.

Turn the other cheek, then crouch, aim, fire

2005-08-23T11:25:00.000-04:00

Turn the other cheek, then crouch, aim, fire

Pat Robertson of the Christian Coalition (CC) seems to be calling for the assassination of Venezuela's lefty-strong man Hugo Chavez. But could this be a desperate bid for publicity in response to other problems, i.e. financial, evidenced by the CC organization's slipping in its bill payments, at least according to a deadwood note in today's Washington Post about a lawsuit by Pitney Bowes against the CC for non-payment?

UPDATE: Thanks to a correspondent the lawsuit story is here. And another here.

2005-07-26T18:31:00.000-04:00

What's in a Name?

I have always felt that insurgent terrorists were merely statists in the audition phase. For those who like poetic arguments, and strange connections, there is an interesting illustration of this.

What mystical terrorism do we fear? The lone walking explosive with a religious sense of virtue ready to murder his chosen enemy. He carries his explosive in a backpack or knapsack.

What was the most occult fearsome state terror squad? Perhaps it was Haitian dictator "Papa Doc" Duvalier's special police force that went by the infamous voodoo-derived name the "Tonton Macoutes".

That terror force had a curiously unthreatening name, when considered literally, despite its origin in a Christmas voodoo folk-villain, a Santa Claus from hell who who punished evil children. The unthreatening name, however, has become an even more apt name of political terror and murder than its founder might have dreamed:

"Uncle Knapsack"

Not logical, but ironically poetic, doncha think?

2005-07-14T20:43:00.000-04:00

Hypocrisy in defense of liberty is no vice

Hypocrisy, the adage goes, is the tribute vice pays to virtue. But are we even losing that miniscule sense of decency?

In a deadwood Washington Post article (July 14, A16), District of Columbia Metro (i.e. subway) Transit Police Chief Polly Hanson -- clearly no pollyanna -- speaks of doing random searches of passenger handbags:

It's something I very much want to do. The timing is important on something like that, and I feel that this is a time when it would be well received."

As a rider of said system, I am not sure I find random searches wholly unreasonable. But whatever happened to the decency of a police official in a free Bill of Rights-bred society at least pretending that this is a regrettable necessity reluctantly sought and temperately argued.

Please, tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies. As in "it may unfortunately be essential to basic security to implement such steps though we had earnestly hoped to avoid them, and it is terrible to discuss this at this awful time."

That a public official feels no need to even grudgingly defer to a pretense of caring about freedom and privacy is truly sad but hey....

"9/11 changed everything."

Indeed: vice does not even owe virtue courtesy, much less tribute.

2005-07-04T13:38:00.000-04:00

Constitutionalism by the Kelo

Jim Henley comments on my offer you can refuse, in a full post further below, of $50 if one can convince me that the Fifth Amendment takings clause textually restricts public takings to "public use".

Here's Jim:

"Near as I can tell, Matthew is not making the too-clever-by-half argument that the literal meaning of the Constitution requires compensation for “public use” takings but permits “private use” takings without compensation."

Although that had not been my original intent, if you'll pardon the expression, or my main one, a later discovery indicates it indeed may be the case. See my broader comment below.

Back to Jim:

(Refuting this is simple enough. Ask yourself, “Why would the framers have wanted to restrict public use takings more than private use ones?” Answer: the very thought is absurd. Therefore it cannot mean that.) He’s saying instead that the clause makes no effort to define a restrictive meaning of “public use,” and therefore Kelo’s circular interpretation - public use is any purpose for which a government siezes property - is constitutionally correct.

Yes, I do mean that, sadly. (Though not exactly: takings of property when done by government are not always, or typically, for public use or even a general discretionary purpose. More later on this. The "takings for public use" phrase probably simply means "exercise of eminent domain".) What the clause does nobly is attempt to hobble those eminent domain exercises quantitatively, i.e. by requiring payouts of compensation, and not qualitatively, i.e. by specifying what is or is not the proper extent of eminent domain. That is left blank, or left for other clauses.

But the seemingly "absurd" part Jim mentioned turns out to be true as well, as I feared before looking at it in detail. (BTW, a taking for "private purposes" might include freeing slaves, in that case the government doesnt "use" them, but an expansive reading would have permitted that though the freeing would be a taking NOT for public "use" but a private benefit flowing from an asbtractly broad (beyond even tax revenue increase or economic development) "public purpose" (liberation). Madison did indeed have that issue very much in mind, see article cited below, when he explained the takings clause, and he felt that the *compensation* part would inhibit it, he did not specify the "public use" part, even though freeing the slaves is the direct opposite of a literal narrow public "use" taking.)

Let me add to this via a reply to Jim's site that bounced back due to some technical reason from his site (further below). I probably should emphasize here that there are and were "takings" by government that are also normally uncompensated, which is why one should assume that "takings for public use" is simply descriptive of the type of taking and not a limitation to it: punishments for crimes, collections of debts. Additionally in colonial times as well, and NOT done by the crown but by fellow colonial legislators, there were takings for private use -- undeveloped property could be taken by law and given to developers. More on that further down.

Since I want, like most libertarians, an expansive protection of property from the Fifth Amendment clause, and it does not use restrictive language on "public use", I WANT it to read that "public use" is an expansive concept, so that it will embrace ANY government taking of property under, or purportedly under, eminent domain. So that a government would at least have to pay for doing the damage, a big incentive for hesitancy.

One could even envision an interpretation that would include the original owners of taken land receiving all increased tax revenue from a seizure. (Just 'cause it's libertarian, doesn't mean it's constitutional and vice-versa.)

My more detailed reply to Jim (with some minor corrections):

“Why would the framers have wanted to restrict public use takings more than private use ones?” Answer: the very thought is absurd. Therefore it cannot mean that."

Jim -- Further looks at the subject, by grace of thoughtful H&R commenter Baylen, found this evil pro-takings article (but whose facts seem ok and almost certainly true) http://www.law.georgetown.edu/gelpi/papers/ptreanr.htm
which does indicate that the above "absurdity" you identify may indeed be exactly what they were thinking.

The Founders did not especially fear a) government takings for private use, they were colonial legislators and State legislators using traditional English law and colonial local powers (see below) who did such takings regularly, nor did they fear b) takings for other public purposes (as opposed to merely literal "public use" purpose), as eg, tax seizures, punishment for crime, health, safety, and morals condemnations etc.

The Framers feared specifically *public*, ie government and probably a central one at that, takings without compensation (one implication of bills of attainder, btw); they were freaked by the Crown, by the central Congress's Continental Army's arbitrary seizures in the Revolution; Madison also thought the anti-Tory confiscation measures went too far --imagine a permanent central government doing such things. The compensation clause was seen as the proper limiting step, there isn't even a hint of limiting, or defining, language for "public use" in the clause where "public use" is used.

We ought not to back-inject the Framers with Lockean and Smithian purism. They were first and foremost State legislators. It was the much later more pro-property courts of the 19th century and beyond which began reading into the language some wholly (and in my opinion nobly) newly constructed out-of-the-blue limits, such as saying you can use eminent domain ONLY for "public use" despite the clear absence of any such limitation in the plain language of the Amendment.

Now, consider these colonial era malignant normalcies from the cited article:

"Many colonial laws imposed affirmative obligations on residents to use their property for some specific purpose to advance the overall interests of the community. A Plymouth colony ordinance required those with rights in valuable minerals to exploit their rights or forfeit them. A Maryland law required owners of good mill sites to develop the sites or run the risk of losing their property to someone else who would develop the site. Similarly, when [private] land was not developed or bridges fell into disuse, colonial governments took these properties from their owners and transferred them to someone else."

I agree that the Kelo outcome is truly evil, but there is no reason for anyone to get literalist and historicalist. It is the nonliteralism and non-originalism which saves the day.

A $50.00 Offer to the Blogosphere Re: Kelo

2005-06-30T23:40:00.000-04:00

A $50.00 Offer to the Blogosphere, Re: Kelo

It's official. You get $50, O blogosphere member. Especially one of y'all who felt understandable anguish over the hideous meaning of Kelo v. New London.

Just be first to convince me: at my email notanempire- at - aol.com (you know how to fix that) that the textual language of the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution and its Takings Clause RESTRICTS government takings only to situations of "public use."

It doesn't say that. It says ONLY that WHEN public use takings occur, there must be just compensation paid. That's it. No restrictions are made in that amendment on takings, except that due process must be applied in doing it. That's fair. Due process usually means notice, hearing and appeal.

I am sole and final judge of whether I am convinced. (Offer closes July 12, or otherwise at my discretion.) Convincing answer posted here as well as good ones, if I feel it. (Haven't been able to activate comments.)

I bring this up in part to rebuke all those tantrum-throwers who are stamping their feet in literalist fury saying "but the constitution says 'public use', not 'public purposes'. 'Use' means use!" Well perhaps, but if literal meanings matter, then "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation" simply literally means what it says -- that when a "public use" taking (as opposed to other takings like as punishment for a crime) occurs, there will be a fair price paid. It does NOT say anything about public takings being restricted to public use. One ought not hang one's hat on textual literalism when the whole power of the clause relies on going beyond textual literalism.

Actually, it appears that "public use" is simply a synonym for "where there is an exercise of eminent domain." Without saying what the limits are of that.

The ugly fact about this decision with its ugly implcation -- private property-wise and liberty-wise -- is that it was a good politically conservative decision. If one were to be a good textualist and rely on the language of the 5th Amendment, there is no restriction. Further, it is a good conservative decision in that it defers to local government on local issues.

Literalists: beware of what you want......

Kelo is a horrible rule, but alas, it makes literal constitutional sense, although that was not argued to my knowledge. One needs to construct a better historical argument as stare decisis is the only basis for resisting this expansion of government powers and not literalism of language.

Here, don't totally blame the Left or the corporate Right, alone or together. It's the Framers that done it.

2005-06-10T10:46:00.000-04:00

Mourning Becomes Electrode, or
Where is Lynddie England when you need her?

Bloggers heavy on the morals and immorals of torture are missing a great issue. I refer to the ongoing story of the young lady missing in Aruba. Some known individuals may know the missing gal's whereabouts. Shouldn't they get the full electrode treatment to help find her?

Sad to say, I don't have nearly as strong opinion an opinion on the absolute evil of torture as a libertarian should, though I do have a general "I'm again' it". (I do think, however, that certain kinds of post-judicial due process corporal punishment ought not be ruled out). Nevertheless, equivocating further, I am also sure that the bulk of purported actions of torture by "our side" and the justifications for them are actually rooted in frustration, sadism, and an ill-focused and even racist sense of revenge. Additionally, levels of acceptance of torture are a good barometer of the level of standards of civlized due process.

But the Aruba case presents a true "ticking-bomb" analgoue scenario. (The "ticking bomb" refers to a common justification for torture of terrorists, based on the assumption that the torturee has some necessary knowledge to offset an active deadly operation, like a ticking bomb, where normal crime investigation has insufficient time to act.) In this case, some arrestees may have knowlege of the location of a person who may be alive but in captivity or injured -- it is not unknown for kidnappers to leave victims to die, or who are thought to be dead, in some hellhole, as recently happened with a little girl in a dumpster.

I also caution that in reality the ticking-bomb justification is far more a rationalization, as torture is often systematically practiced where it is done, and are not ad hoc measures for urgent information.

So, is torture ok in cases like the lost girl in Aruba? Should they take the suspects with the story that doesn't add up about her whereabouts and turn them over to Lynddie England?

2005-06-09T11:38:00.000-04:00

Reefer Madness

I admit I am having policy logic problems with the recent medical marijuana/Commerce Clause Supreme Court decision. Others may have brought this up and I may have missed it. But I have to ask: if federally putting an end to the production of marijuana that is grown legally (under local laws) at home for home medical use is done for the ostensible reason of regulating interstate commerce, doesn't that logically mean that the federal government is intervening to protect the interstate illegal nationwide commerce in the noxious weed?

Forget the Constitution text, does this pass the "rational relationship" test?

2005-06-09T11:10:00.000-04:00

If true, this is getting a bit out of hand, doncha think?

US troops accused of abusing American contractors.

Let's hope this is bull:

He said his clients told him that Marines had "slammed around" several contractors, stripped them to their underwear and placed a loaded weapon near their heads.

"How does it feel to be a big, rich contractor now?" the Marines shouted at the men, Schopper said, in an apparent reference to the large salaries security contractors can make in Iraq.

He also said that during their detention, the workers' relatives in the United States received phone calls from people with American accents threatening to kill their loved ones if they talked about the incident.

Update: The Other Side of the Story

If only ONE of these two accounts are true, this is not a good sign.

Military investigates American guards in Iraq
Contractors allegedly went on shooting spree in Fallujah
The Associated Press
Updated: 5:57 a.m. ET June 9, 2005

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Sixteen private American security guards are under investigation for shooting at U.S. Marines and Iraqi civilians during a three-hour spree west of Baghdad, the military said Thursday.

The Marines said the 16 Americans and three Iraqi contractors were arrested and held in a military jail for three days after spraying small arms fire at Iraqi civilians and U.S. forces from their cars in Fallujah late last month.

2005-06-04T10:36:00.000-04:00

Thus June 9, DC fan: Plan to ban the ban

For DC area pro-choice people: that is those who favor choice by a free people i.e. by businesses and consenting customers and employees, in their ability to choose the nature of their environment and entertainment. Go to the below. Info, text, and argument via Gene Healy:

On Thursday, June 9, Ward One Concilmemeber Jim Graham will host a Townhall Meeting on the various smoking ban proposals before the city council. Take a look at some of the event sponsors on Graham’s website. It doesn’t look like it will be a good day for people who prefer choice to force.

But you can help, just by showing up. Tell your friends, tell your favorite bartenders, tell your neighbors: tell anyone who might be interested to show up and make their preference for a choice between smoking and non-smoking bars known.

WHAT: Jim Graham’s Townhall Meeting
WHEN: Thursday, June 9 at 7pm
WHERE: The Lincoln Theater, 1215 U St, NW
WHY: To help stop the DC Smoking Ban

2005-06-01T22:55:00.000-04:00

Henley the Aid, I Am, I Am

Many thanks to the inimitable Jim Henley (say that five times fast) for a mention of this blog, and my old mesolibertarian essay that even I lost track of. Thank you spyware, and my own failure to back it up. The essay was written in the heat of entering the blogworld and webdebate world in 2002 and seeing the entire war issue fought between the neos (Instapundit types) and the paleos (Justin Raimondo types). With the great Jacob Sullum seemingly whining about the sufferings of Israeli soldier relatives on the West Bank, even I lost momentary faith there but should not have.

I am also occasionally in the red column here.

I have followed Jim's loaded and goaded suggestion on the atom. thing. ("Maybe he’ll even go into his Blogger setup options and add an Atom feed like the modern Blogspot bloggers do."). Whatever that means (blogger.com help didn't help) but I did something, I think, with an atom.html link, or something. I assume something happened. Someone let me know if whatever was supposed to happen, did indeed happen.

Deep Thoughts about Deep Throat

2005-06-01T15:06:00.000-04:00

Deep Thoughts About Deep Throat

{I should and probably will extend and revise these remarks in the near future.}

"I say, if you can't find a man with integrity, find a man with ambition." Such was the advice of the evil young future emperor Caligula to the evil old current emperor Tiberius in the old British TV-miniseries I Claudius. He was telling the old ruler how to find someone to overthrow the emperor's politically entrenched evil and now-renegade henchman, Aelius Sejanus, the de facto head of Rome's government.

I am reminded of this upon the revelation that the identity of Watergate's Deep Throat was W. Mark Felt, and that he was, to some extent, a disgruntled employee of frustrated ambition (to be FBI chief).

This recognition of the decisive motivating role of one's sense of place in life leads to a deep thought on why I am of libertarian outlook. In the end -- or perhaps at the start -- we humans are out to secure our own individual place, and we guard and revenge it selfishly, violently, and with ruthless indifference to others, if not outright predatoriness. Even genuine heroic charitable nobility requires pursuing determinedly, sometimes to the exclusion of other worthy pursuits in life, one's place as a self-sacrificing, even loving, individual. (This is a good thing overall to pursue; I am not diminishing its worth by pointing out its self-actualizing psychological prerequisite and economic cost of forgoing other things.)

The Bible and Nietzsche agree on this point, with the former advising that we love our neighbor as ourself, thereby assuming as a given that we love ourselves. (But assuming we need a divine push to make that love turn extroverted.)

The pursuit of happiness would otherwise trample boatloads of corpses. And often does.

Now, amplify that unavoidable self-orientation in our nature with the violent power and communal legitimation given by government and all things of evil become possible: gulags, Jim Crow, Auschwitz (implicit Godwin's law violation, sorry), etc.

This is why government ultimately needs to exist at a middle, and limited, level. Not strong enough to dominate, but procedurally hindered by checks and balances; yet not weak enough to fail to check miscreants and/or outsiders who abuse others in their pursuit of happiness.

Such is done by maximizing the function of government as protector of a non-predatory pursuit of happiness. It does this through securing the liberty of all who are under its rule while not messing with others who do not mess with those it is called on to protect.

2005-05-27T14:05:00.000-04:00

Peer amid the Pyramids: Your tax dollars at work

Egypt receives something like $2 billion/year, is it, from USA.

"CAIRO -- Crowds of pro-government demonstrators attacked opponents of President Hosni Mubarak on Wednesday while police looked on, staining a day of national voting that government leaders had touted as a major step toward democracy."

Or this:

Hossam al-Hamalawy, a news assistant with the LA Times . . . said to him, “Hey what is going on? They are going to slaughter them.” The officer coldly replied, “We have our orders.” Amazed and confused Hossam asked, “Do your orders include having people kill each other in the streets?” The officer smirked and said “Yes”.

2005-05-27T13:13:00.000-04:00

Libertarian liberation in Iraq?

I understand conservative interventionists may not mind, but how can allegedly libertarian ones square this stuff as liberation, except maybe to say that it is happening democratically?

"Iraq's interim government revived the death penalty last August for . . . drug trafficking."

But if sharia law were imposed democratically, and it is quite possible in Iraq, would that be liberation too? Under the standard of democratic process = liberation, it would be. Which is why libertarian interventionism is a dangerous crock or near-crock.

2005-05-27T13:02:00.000-04:00

Rhymes with Bitch

This court order has not become a great public issue at least yet. "An Indianapolis father," the story runs about divorced Wiccan (whence comes witchcraft) parents, "is appealing a Marion County judge's unusual order that prohibits him and his ex-wife from exposing their child to 'non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals.'" Anyone seeing a gray area? Not me. (Via Radley Balko.)

2005-05-17T20:35:00.000-04:00

Full of Gas

The Maryland Comptroller in a May 17 letter protests an earlier article in the Washington Post of May 1.

The Comptroller defends Maryland’s gas price control system against a pro-free market author’s claims that the system has helped cause higher gas prices for Marylanders. The law, subject to some theoretically worthy exceptions, basically prohibits retailers from selling gas below cost.

Writes William Donald Schaefer: “[The May 1 article] suggested that Maryland passed a law four years ago to keep gas prices up”.

But he then adds in the next sentence, and I quote (emphasis added):

On the contrary, the law was passed to prevent any retailer from unfairly eliminating competition by selling gas for less than it costs.

The word “contrary” appears to have acquired a brave new meaning.

The operative expression here, minus the purported rationale, is that “the law was passed to prevent any retailer from . . . selling gas for less than it costs.” More narrowly: “to prevent any retailer from . . . selling gas for less. . . .”

Now if the law is designed to prevent gas prices from lowering to where they might want to go, it should be clear that the law has the effect, if not the design, of keeping gas prices UP.

I think the word “consequent” is more appropriate than “contrary”.

Further note: according to the Maryland Comptroller the law is supposed to have the aim of “facilitating competition.” Ah, sorry. The law is, well, to the contrary.

Selling below cost is a classic move of strategic business competition and promotion; prohibiting this is certainly NOT facilitating competition.

2005-04-30T13:40:00.000-04:00

Empiromania

Is the ideological cat out of the bag at Neocon Central?

Darth Vader is giving the invocation. Lunch is Caesar salad.

BOOK FORUM --- In Praise of Empires: Globalization and Order

Tuesday, May 10, 2005, 10:00 a.m.–noon
American Enterprise Institute
Wohlstetter Conference Center, Twelfth Floor,
1150 Seventeenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036

2005-04-27T09:03:00.000-04:00

Civil War in Iraq

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/BAK623643.htm

Whereas once politicians were not willing to utter the term for fear of dignifying it, it is no longer taboo. "I do not want to say civil war, but we are going the Lebanese route, and we know where that led," says Sabah Kadhim, an adviser to the Interior Ministry who spent years in exile before returning to Iraq after Saddam Hussein's overthrow. "We are going to end up with certain areas that are controlled by certain warlords ... It's Sunni versus Shi'ite, that is the issue...

Well, maybe it will be a democratic civil war.

2005-04-22T15:55:00.000-04:00

Every spam is sacred

There was much speculation about the possible election of Nigerian Cardinal Franics Arinze as Pope, making him the first black Pope. Instead, however, European German Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was elected, rather than the Nigerian prelate.

Could that explain the email I got today?

"DEAR BLESSED CHILD OF GOD, I KNOW YOU CAN HELP!

HELLO, I AM FRANCIS CARDINAL ARINZE FROM NIGERIA, PREFECT OF THE DIVINE WORSHIP AND THE DISCIPLINE OF THE SACRAMENTS.
PLEASE HELP ME. I HAVE A DEPOSIT OF $10 MILLIONs IN THE VATICAN BANK, AND NOW I CAN'T GET IT BACK WITHOUT YOUR HELP. I WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ELECTED POPE IN THE ROME CONCLAVE BUT DUE TO A RACIST CONSPIRACY, I WAS DENIED IT.

IF YOU EMAIL ME AT THIS ADDRESS, YOU CAN HELP ME CORRECT THIS SIN AND RECOVER THE MONEY AND SHARE IN SOME OF ITS BLESSINGS. GOD BLESS YOU, AMEN.

Shouldn't there be some kind of investigation about this?

Well, at least the new Pope's got email. Really, if it had been the Nigerian cardinal instead, would he have been able to get any recipients to take them seriously?

2005-04-02T13:23:00.000-05:00

Still testing....

2005-04-02T13:20:00.000-05:00

Testing comments...

2005-04-02T13:06:00.000-05:00

Trying to be up and running shortly.

2004-07-27T13:14:00.000-04:00

Slacker

Hmmm... no post since November. Is that a good definition of "slacking off"?

2004-03-26T13:14:00.000-05:00

With this date control thing....I can really do an Orwellian history rewrite.

2003-11-07T09:41:00.000-05:00

Cigarettes do cause cancer. They certainly cause government intrusion to metastasize. Check out Ban the Ban.

2003-10-30T17:02:00.000-05:00

What I learned at the blog-a-rama:

The blogarama (blogorama?) at Kalorama several days back produced a few insightful discoveries:

1. Julian Sanchez can retain lucid top-level intelligence despite the distractions of alcohol, fun, crowds, and female pulchritude that would kill the ordinary human. Sorry to learn of his recent experience with a private-sector attempt at income redistribution. Glad he's ok.

2. Jim Henley really did lose all that weight, and while every weightloss entry on his blog may not be riveting, he is the Salam Pax of the Battle of the Bulge.

3. Women who blog and/or like comic books are NOT unattractive nerds, quite the opposite … see photos on Julian’s site.

4. Although I already knew this, Gene Healy still does not look like the simian caricature at the top of his blog at AFF. Though he probably does to Sarah Brady.

5. Radley Balko manages to accomplish what most guys merely dream: to look distinguished, hip, and menacing at the same time. I hope he never picks a fight with me. Wait…..he already did. :-)

2003-10-07T16:19:00.000-04:00

Libertarians, American Patriotism, and American Conservatism: An Early or Late July 4 Entry

This entry on the subject of libertarians, American patriotism, and American conservatism probably belongs on July 4 but this article from The American Prospect, which includes the near-ferocious skepticism of many of us libertarians to the Iraq venture and the direction of the Republican Party, encourages one to lay out one's thinking about the issues of conservatism, patriotism, and libertarianism without regard to particular occasions.

And just the other day, I think it all came together for me. What all came together? The answer to why many of us libertarians who can be so critical of our national policies, both foreign and domestic, and lately the Republican conservatives of certain stripes, nonetheless feel so strongly an enduring traditional patriotism, a natural pro-Americanism, and a lingering comfort and identity with the American Right.

It all comes together in this basic observation: that Americans' sense of identity and honor is rooted in what we libertarians esteem the most -- a sense of liberty. Recall that overplayed song – “I’m proud to be an American/ Where at least I know I’m free.” For all its jingoism, war context, and falsity on many issues, it reflects the authentic and sincere traditional in-bred American association of pride and honor with political freedom.

The failures of American liberty, from slavery to protective tariffs, from drug wars to Iraq wars, and the hypocrisy of the rhetoric of freedom, do not detract from the sincerity of our belief in freedom, and the many actual sacrifices and successes in trying to make it work.

The association of national honor and liberty also explains something else: why libertarians find a home on the American Right. Despite many radical and untraditional tendencies, non-anarchist American libertarians have a basic conservatism in the sense that they care about American national honor, because of its association with liberty.

Sincere caring about national honor is a ”right-wing” characteristic.

I may find myself in agreement with a Euro-lefty on the Iraq attack or other foreign overstretches, and some other things, but in the end, I like America. I like what the Euro (and American) lefty doesn’t like. I like our passion for private gun ownership, our disdain of government management of social wealth. I like technological modernity, I even like oil producers whatever the sins of the companies. I like the resistance to the idea that health care should be a national government program. I like it that tax cuts evoke favorable passion. I am ambivalent about capital punishment but I like that our society believe in holding individuals fully and equally accountable for the deprivation of others’ rights.

I like the fact that the rhetoric of liberating Iraq proves seductive to Americans, even if fundamentally wrong-headed in purpose and execution.

It is even a qualifiedly attractive feature that we care enough about liberty to be, from time to time, conspicuous hypocrites about it. Hypocrisy, the adage goes, is the tribute vice pays to virtue. I can celebrate that our national honor is such that it requires us to pay tribute not to just any social good, but to the most important virtue a political jurisdiction can possess: liberty. We Americans feel strong enough about it that we have to pay tribute to it even at those times it is irrelevant or we dishonor it, at home and abroad. (Operation "Iraqi Freedom", Operation "Enduring Freedom", the "free world" , etc.)

Patriotism, the love of our way or what our way should be, appeals to American libertarians because of our national sense of honor is rooted in liberty. Such an appeal not only affords us an identity but is also a virtuous call to vigilance.

With our national honor rightly placed, the call to hard work remains alive: to bring that libertarian sense of honor to fruition.

2003-10-02T09:15:00.000-04:00

Scroll further down for:

* a look at libertarians, patriotism, and conservatism

* a less-than-starry-eyed view of Irish contributions to America

2003-10-02T09:14:00.000-04:00

The "Effendi Theory" & Iraq Policy: Leon Uris Lives On

One of the main people morally responsible for the mess in the Middle East, author Leon Uris, died several weeks back ironically not long before his writer-nemesis Edward Said, who died just a few days ago. But Uris is the topic here, however. For he successfully pioneered a romantic and sanitized version of the founding of modern Israel in his novels that reinforced prejudices and misinformation influencing many Americans in evaluating the broader issues of the entire region today. But instead of his myths' being cast aside by age and greater understanding, they appear to resonate and thrive in the Iraq policy thinking of current Administration advisers, particularly the neoconservatives and also the President himself. The influence is manifest most clearly in the oft-stated belief that somehow the act of simply eliminating Arab dictators, as was done with Saddam in Iraq, is the ready one-step key to uprooting terrorism emanating from the area.

Uris' major works like “Exodus” and “The Haj” influenced Americans who came of age in the 1950s and 1960s and who now are running the show. Indirectly, he introduced into popular culture a theory of Arab society that seems to fuel the idea that terror and violence in and from the Middle East is not an outgrowth of any real complaints or problems or complex interactions but only a matter of trouble-making petty Arab leaders "stirring up" the dim-witted peasantry against assorted infidels in order to distract from their own misrule.

We can give this old-new doctrine a name: the "Effendi theory." The term "Effendi" was a title for landowners who formed a semi-feudal lesser nobility in Palestine and other parts of the Near East at the time of World War One and the end of Turkish rule over the region. In the Israeli romantic myth promulgated by Uris, Arab resistance to Zionist-sponsored Jewish settlement in the early part of last century, as well as resistance to post WWI Western rule, was rooted primarily, if not solely, in some kind of backward religious xenophobic anti-Semitism and anti-modernism cynically incited by the "Effendis" who feared losing their power.

We encounter an amplified echo of this theory in the Iraq policy thinking of the Administration through FoxNews, MEMRI, and the National Review. We hear it when it is proclaimed that local Arab dictators are manufacturing out of whole cloth hostility to things Western and Israeli. Or when we see people overly obsess on the content of al-Jazeera or Arab textbooks, noxious though that content may sometimes be, as if to say that that rhetoric is the "real" root of regional trouble, Arab-Israeli hostility, and anti-Western sentiment.

It is sad that our foreign policy hopes are descended from a fiction emerging from the pop-rationalizations of one side of a local turf conflict. Those rationalizations in turn were developed by now discarded and discredited empires, like the British and the French in the Middle East. And then translated through hyperbolic and, frankly, simplistically bigoted writers like Uris.

Actually, Arab resistance to the founding of Israel and Western rule rested on far more than just nervous nasty Effendis. Despite the actual existence of such demagogic grandees and their machinations, particularly the repugnant Amin al-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who became a Nazi collaborator, Arab objections to Jewish settlement and Anglo-French colonization was pretty much the same as anyone's would be if foreigners were injected into one's country, or injected themselves, with the express unratified intent to take it over for their own purposes.

Other issues, like local anti-Semitism, backwardness, religious and ethnic chauvinism were and are all there, and they do matter, but the basic picture has been that of one group being settled upon by others who did not take them into sufficient or honorable account. And then the receiving group getting riled about it in ways fair and foul, something which happens all the time in our species. Whether or not hostility to the West and Israel among Arabs has been kept in rational proportion to the claimed grievances, and whether it is riddled with prejudice and misunderstanding, present fair questions. But we need not accept that hostility and terrorism are all a matter of incitement by local plutocrats. In fact, such a theory of plutocrat manipulation sounds a little like a theme of anti-Semitism itself.

Nevertheless, as President Bush's recent address indicates, we Americans are resting our whole multi-billion dollar and multi-American-lives strategy of regional anti-terrorism and pre-emptive warfare on a bogus theory requiring a vast campaign of dubious social engineering. That is dangerous enough alone, given that top-down social revolution is rarely likely to work. (Japan is not a valid counter-example for reasons too long to get into here.) But it also remains the case that the idea of imposed social improvement curing terrorism is predicated on the false assumption that there are no understandable or valid grievances against the USA, the West and Israel (however wrongly they may be pursued at times), and that the fears and resentment are all a chimera manufactured by the modern Effendis, who today are said to be the Saudi "Wahhabis", Saddam Hussein, the (non-Arab) Iranian mullahs, the dictator of Syria, etc.

And that's hooey, or at least not wholly true. And even if it weren't mostly false, nevertheless the measures required to forcefully implement such a social revolutionary change -- the requisite warfare and repression and related inevitable mistakes -- would most likely create those grievances, especially when ""liberation" is undertaken by inept hands. At that point, it won't be a matter of Effendis, sheikhs, and dictators but of populations and armies and terrorists confronting each other in ever greater violence. As has happened between Arabs and Israelis.

But it should not happen to us though it appears to be starting.

Leon Uris wrote his first popular Middle East romance in the late 50s. Since then, there have been many more Middle East wars, more destruction, more terror. And more Leon Uris novels. Obviously he failed fundamentally at getting something right. Romances like his, and their underlying theories that Arab societies are simply dictator-manipulated automatons of hate, have not worked in any helpful way. Let's not compound the idiocy: those raised on this mythology, including leading government officials and think-tankers, should be able to break their own programming.

If we are to end terrorism from the Middle East, perhaps it is better to work not to exacerbate the mutual crimes between Arab and Israeli, now degenerated into suicide-murder and indiscriminate raids. It is best to regard the peoples of the region as worthy of their own internal mistakes and development. Prosecute and kill those who attack us, sure. Stop aiding dictators and military occupiers, definitely. Approve reasonable international norms, including the legitimacy of Israel and the basic rights of occupied Palestinians, undoubtedly.

And start minding our own business, absolutely.

In any event, let's try to avoid sending our kids and others' to die based upon bad and outdated social theories spread by hack writers and internalized through pop fiction.

2003-10-01T15:39:00.000-04:00

Scroll down for entries on libertarians and patriotism, and a wry look at Irish contributions to America, and more.

The Plame Game. Oh, via Jim Henley, via Atrios, an outraged CIAer on the Plame leak.

Libertarians, American Patriotism, and American Conservatism: An Early or Late July 4 Entry

This entry on the subject of libertarians, American patriotism, and American conservatism probably belongs on July 4. But in the context of the often cynical appeals to patriotism that occur today and the near-ferocious skepticism of many of us libertarians to the Iraq venture, thinking about the issues of patriotism, national pride, and libertarianism is more constant than just an Independence Day meditation.

Further the time is right because just the other day, I think it all came together for me. What all came together? The answer to why many of us libertarians who can be so critical of our national policies, both foreign and domestic, nonetheless feel so strongly an enduring traditional patriotism, a natural pro-Americanism, and a lingering comfort and identity with the American Right.

It all comes together in this basic observation: that Americans' sense of identity and honor is rooted in what we libertarians esteem the most -- a sense of liberty. Recall that overplayed song – “I’m proud to be an American/ Where at least I know I’m free.” For all its jingoism, war context, and falsity on many issues, it reflects the authentic and sincere American association of pride and honor with political freedom.

The failures of American liberty, from slavery to protective tariffs, from drug wars to Iraq wars, and the hypocrisy of the rhetoric of freedom, do not detract from the sincerity of our belief in freedom, and the many actual sacrifices and successes in trying to make it work.

The association of national honor and liberty also explains something else: why libertarians find a home on the American Right. Despite many radical and untraditional tendencies, non-anarchist libertarians have a basic conservatism in the sense that they care about American national honor, because of its association with liberty.

Sincere caring about national honor is a ”right-wing” characteristic.

I may find myself in agreement with a Euro-lefty on the Iraq attack or other foreign overstretches, and some other things, but in the end, I like America. I like what the Euro (and American) lefty doesn’t like. I like our passion for private gun ownership, our disdain of government management of social wealth. I like technological modernity, I even like oil producers whatever the sins of the companies. I like the resistance to the idea that health care should be a national government program. I like it that tax cuts evoke favorable passion. I am ambivalent about capital punishment but I like that our society believe in holding individuals fully and equally accountable for the deprivation of others’ rights.

I like the fact that the rhetoric of liberating Iraq proves seductive to Americans, even if fundamentally wrong-headed in purpose and execution.

It is even a qualifiedly attractive feature that we care enough about liberty to be, from time to time, conspicuous hypocrites about it. Hypocrisy, the adage goes, is the tribute vice pays to virtue. I can celebrate that our national honor is such that it requires us to pay tribute not to just any social good, but to the most important virtue a political jurisdiction can possess: liberty. We Americans feel strong enough about it that we have to pay tribute to it even at those times it is irrelevant or we dishonor it, at home and abroad. (Operation "Iraqi Freedom", Operation "Enduring Freedom", the "free world" , etc.)

Patriotism, the love of our way or what our way should be, appeals to American libertarians because of our national sense of honor is rooted in liberty. Such an appeal not only affords us an identity but is also a virtuous call to vigilance.

With our national honor rightly placed, the call to hard work remains alive: to bring that libertarian sense of honor to fruition.

2003-09-29T14:48:00.000-04:00

Scroll down for:

a. a less-than-flattering view of Irish contributions to America

b. stuff on the Iraqi war

c. Ways for bloggers to make $$$: Product placement blogging

2003-03-17T15:52:00.000-05:00

WEARIN’ DOWN THE GREEN: A ST. PATRICK’S DAY “APPRECIATION” OF THE IRISH-AMERICANS AND OUR OVERLOOKED “CONTRIBUTIONS” TO AMERICA

[*Warning to the humor-impaired and ethnically hypersensitive, DO NOT READ FURTHER!! The author is actually obscenely proud of his Gaelic heritage (not that he did anything to earn it), thinks British misrule in Ireland was horrible and enabled the Famine, thinks Sinn Fein and the worthy Congressman Peter King (please vote for him) have articulated real grievances, regards the Rev. Ian Paisley as a first-rate scumbag, and admires greatly (most of) the priests that educated him. He also thinks the police and other emergency security civil servants are underpaid folks of actual or potential heroism who put their life out on the line for the average person. A nice little reflection on Irish libertarians is available on Gene Healy's blog today.]

Others have a nationality. The Irish and Jews have a psychosis. -- Dead Irish writer, nationalist, and internationally renowned drunk Brendan Behan, sagely explaining more than one world trouble spot in a single epigram.

Few realize how many Irish contributions to American life there are. St. Patrick’s Day allows us to recall them. They go well beyond President John F. Kennedy, best known to the current generation for being killed, or Bing Crosby, best known to the same generation for being dead.

I am qualified to speak. My ancestors migrated to these shores from the Emerald Isle circa 1847 during the era of the potato famine. Between 1845 and 1850 as many as 2 million Irish died or emigrated as a result of a recurrent blight that killed large portions of each year’s potato crop. Finally in 1850 after 5 years of unprecedented catastrophe, a committee of leading Irish agronomists studied the problem and solved it by arguing that “sure’n after 5 years we might start growin’ and eatin’ somethin’ else.” To which the nationalist Ireland Youth movement further added the phrase, “And if it weren’t for the damned English we would have thought o’ that earlier.”

Some background. The original language of St. Patrick-land, by the way, is Irish Gaelic and not the familiar hi-brow classy English of the Lucky Charms leprechaun. The original language disappeared because its pronunciation and spelling bear no logical relation to . . . anything.

For example, in that language my name, Matthew Hogan, is spelled as follows:

Mathghamhainneachaigh O-Ni hOgaimhbheanneachainne

Which two words are pronounced roughly as follows: “Muh Hoy”. However if the word is used as a possessive as in “Matthew Hogan’s” it is pronounced “Vuh Vay”). In the Donegal county dialect the name is pronounced Deh Vay because Mathghamhainneachaigh is spelled Mhathghamhaineachghaighe there, and most accurately means “devoted to Blessed Mary, Ever-Virgin, Mother of God, Queen of Heaven and of the Rosary.” In fact, all Gaelic words mean some variation of that.

Today it is standard to refer to the old language simply as “Irish.” This is more authentic. It seems to be, though in authentic Irish, the word for “Irish” is “Gaelic”. The word for an Irish native is “Gael” and to sharply distinguish them from foreigners, the word for “foreigner” is “Gall”.

Add to the above the fact that in Gaelic, the city name Dublin is pronounced “Blaakleeah” and sometimes “Mlaakleea” and even “Vlakleea”, conceivably all in the same sentence (true: I’m not just satiring here), and we see why the Irish only pretend to want to preserve the ancient tongue.

The only reason they want the language to continue is for politics, in order to keep Ireland’s leading parties names in Gaelic, even when speaking English. This is not done out of “nationalism”, but out of “embarrassment”. The leading Irish parties are the Fine Gael and Fianna Fail. The first means “The Tribe of Gaels” and the second means “Warriors of Fate”. Now if your country had party names that in plain English sound like something that should be spray-painted on an underpass by acne-faced teenagers claiming “territory”, you’d keep it to yourself. So Gaelic lives.

Still more background.The Irish and their language derive from the larger ethnic group called Celtic. This is pronounced “Keltic,” as with a hard “c”, except when they are playing basketball. The word Celtic comes from “Kaltoi” an Indo-European root word meaning “people who cannot tan”.

The Celts’ greatest accomplishments include:

1) ruling half of Europe for a millennium while leaving behind no written or architectural record,
2) developing Halloween’s decorations, and
3) being regularly slaughtered by the Roman and British empires respectively.

Contributions to America Now back to our main St. Patrick’s Day theme: Irish contributions to America. Ireland has sent countless emigrants to America who upon arrival chose to become immigrants. They and their progeny have shaped America and its institutions in many ways that are still not fully appreciated. Here I consider just a few overlooked legacies.

The least appreciated of this immigrant legacy may be municipal corruption. Without the Irish, Tammany Hall, Boss Tweed, and the Pendergast machine of Kansas City that produced Harry S Truman would have been nowhere. Nepotism in police and public service recruitment and promotion would be far harder to find. Civil service in cities like New York would have much too fair personnel practices and far fewer people would be upset by firemen’s statues with Negroid features. And didn’t Mayor Curley govern Boston for a while from jail? Do I have to even mention Chicago Mayor Richard Daley? The Irish helped heal America. Why, without the Irish, voter fraud and other vices of ward politics would have been restricted to Southern backwaters, leading to continued post-Civil War self-righteous sectional stereotypes.

And speaking of Richard Daley, let’s not forget a related Irish gift to America -- police brutality. When some West Indian sporting a cigarette lighter in the wrong place gets gunned down by 80 law enforcement bullets, you can be sure most of the involved officers’ names will read like the Ancient Order of Hibernians’ roster. And wasn’t it a moment of personal pride when a van full of very swarthy types was fired on a little too quickly by New Jersey cops some years back and one of the officers was named Hogan? Without the Irish, Southerners would also have been saddled with this redneck albatross.

And we cannot forget the lasting Irish blessing upon American collegiate and other escapades, and the source for countless entertaining teen films --- no, not the creation of Notre, Dame but the promulgation of public vomiting. Yes, at my strongly Gaelic-American university, I can yet recall unsatirically decades later a keg drinking contest at which Kevin O’Daly, after expelling from his stomach beer “head” foam in an Exorcist-reminiscent projectile flourish, announced with a ruddy face, “And that was just a burp!”

He is a cardiac surgeon today and only occasionally gets nauseous during “opening”.

But all that pales next to another freshly discovered Irish innovation in America: systematically concealed massive clergy child abuse. What state of the union doesn’t hear of a local Bishop O’McFitzpatrick being under scrutiny for diverting the Angelic Friars Poor-Due to buy off the silence of some grown-up kid who in altar boy days once received on his tongue more than just Christ’s body at the hands of a priest with a name like Liam MacSwineegan? Once again, the Irish to the rescue, feeding America’s hungry trial lawyers as well as starving journalists who need yet another issue for “anguished debate” and “startling exposes”.

The above examples are far from exhausting the list of Irish impact on American society. There are still more contributions to remember on St. Patty’s Day. How about the Irish creation of a really expanded Cold War? Without names like Buckley, McCarthy, Donovan, McNamara, Casey, Kennedy, etc. the Cold War with Russia would never have morphed into an orgy of hysterical fears and reckless global interventions which helped keep countless Americans employed over the last decades.

And let’s not forget the gift, encountered all over society, of Irish Alzheimer’s Disease where one progressively only remembers grudges.

Other areas of early influence on modern American society by St. Patrick’s Isle’s descendants in the New World are the invention of the combination race and draft riot (1863--New York), and the financing of foreign subversives and terrorists (Irish rebels and IRA -- 1860- today) . It is widely believed this continues and that the IRA’s inner Executive Command Council consists of Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams, “two guys called Seamus . . . just Seamus”, and New York Congressman Peter King.

On a related point, let’s also not forget the pioneering Irish development of “passionate attachment to a foreign land” ethnic lobbying, now improved on so well by others in the Israel and anti-Castro lobbies.

Nor have the Irish been remiss in cultural pursuits. They gave new energy for example to immigrant and second generation plebian city-dweller bigotry over the last two centuries. Although the tasks of street anti-Semitism and/or color racism have since been passed on to Italian-Americans (cf. Howard Beach) and thence to the Albanians (Bronx and Manhattan) who hold the portfolio today, the Irish do have so many pioneers in that field, particularly the South Bostonian anti-busing rioters of the 1970s. The late 1930s era Father Coughlin was not only a major example of this contribution, but he also illustrates another great Irish contribution to our land -- the political media loudmouth.

What in the world would American TV do or have done without Bill O’Reilly, Chris Matthews, Pat Buchanan, Bob Dornan, Joe McCarthy, and the originator of the television loudmouth brigade -- the late Morton Downey, Jr.? On St. Patrick’s Day it is always good to remember who put the “bully” in “bully pulpit.”

So, the next time you see a shamrock, or a real rock, I charge you with remembering the contributions above. At the very least , remember the words of G.K. Chesterton’s “Ballad of the White Horse,” if I recall the title correctly:

The Great Gaels of Ireland
Are the men that God made mad
For all their wars are merry
And all their songs are sad

Or, if you prefer the Gaelic version:

“Zheh” -- spelled

Gaelmoreireannbeanachtpogmothonglochandoraiseiregobraghbasinherieannmaccumhaillgaelteachtcuplafocaleannaighcennetigbrianboramha.

2003-02-20T14:01:00.000-05:00

You're a blockquote, Charlie Brown! Thanks, Jim Henley of Unqualified Offerings (see side of page), for the blockquote tag tip. Now if only there were an "edit and format tastefully and automatically" tag.

2003-02-19T20:58:00.000-05:00

INVADING IRAQ: UNCANNILY FULFILLING THE BIN-LADEN DOCTRINE

Jason Vest’s recent article in The Nation, whatever its political view, contained commentary from very credible mainstream military sources and critics on the state of our forces, and on the political doctrine under which the invasion of Iraq is supposed to happen. What is most scary is that it appears that our military status and political risks in invading Iraq match what can be called the “Bin-Laden doctrine“. Below I provide the terror master’s political military doctrine -- in his own words as expressed in his latest broadcast -- alongside the assessments of the knowledgable among our military critics, as Vest reports.

Bin-Laden’s assessments of our political-military weaknesses are disturbingly uncanny. An invasion of Iraq plays right into his hands for his aim of clash of civilizations. Invading Iraq is almost a textbook bin-Laden trap. (Which suggests the question: where is bin-Laden, Mr. President? He’s the guy we need to get first.)

Vest reports key military concerns in an Iraq takeover:

Officers ... have real concerns about anti-US backlashes or acts of terrorism down the road--not just against occupation forces in Iraq but against Americans all over the world.

The Bin-Laden doctrine cackles the correctness of their fears:

I also assure those true Muslims should act, incite and mobilise the nation in such great events, hot conditions, in order to break free from the slavery of these tyrannic and apostate regimes, which [are] enslaved by America....

We all know how hot he can create conditions.

Vest reports the widespread commitment required to hold Iraq and stop bin-Laden elsewhere:

These situations may require the dispatch of anything from small special operations detachments to scores of smaller expeditionary forces. ...

Bin-Laden confirms the long-term scope of conflict; he seems not to think Iraq will be over when we say its over:

Our mujaheddin brothers in Iraq....We advise about the importance of drawing the enemy into long, close and exhausting fighting ... in plains, farms, mountains and cities

And he is confident of it spreading to much of the world:

....Among regions ready for liberation are Jordan, Morocco, Nigeria, the country of the two shrines (Saudi Arabia), Yemen and Pakistan.

Vest reports on real fears on systemic weakness in current US military doctrine and personnel in fighting bin-Ladenites:

A recent study by the Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute discovered that more than half of enemy positions went undetected by the high-tech eyes in the sky. How could this happen? "The earth's surface remains an extremely complex environment with an abundance of natural and man-made cover and concealment" that--surprise!--can escape or counter all manner of high-tech detection.

Bin-Laden is hip to the limits of that precise weakness and how to exploit it:

We have recognised that one of the best, effective, and available means to devoid the aerial force of the crusading enemy of its content is by digging large numbers of trenches and camouflaging them in huge numbers....The American forces were bombing us with smart bombs, cluster bombs, and bombs which invade caves. B-52 aircraft were flying every two hours over our heads ... The modified Sinmo 13 aircrafts were bombing us daily ...If all the evil global powers were not capable of defeating one simple mile occupied by mujaheddin using very poor equipment, how can such evil powers triumph over the Islamic world? ...

Vest cites mainstream mlitary critic John Gentry, a retired Special Forces officer and veteran of East Asian and Bosnian operations, for the overemphasis on technology; technology, we might note, that has failed to kill or stop bin-Laden‘s small band:

Gentry points out that as the US military continues to spend money to make its systems and weapons more technology-dependent, the rest of the world will probably find cheap, low-tech ways to get inside this technologically driven decision cycle. This means that "opponents can take deception actions that lead US forces to waste scarce precision munitions on low-value targets.”

Bin-Laden is once again totally aware of the precise weaknesses:

Our mujaheddin brothers in Iraq, don't worry about ... their power and their smart bombs and laser ones. Such smart bombs have no use among the mountains, trenches, plains, and forests...The only way is haphazard bombing which depletes the enemy's ammunition and the enemy's money. ..Such a way will deplete all your enemy's reserves in a few months.

Curious, by the way, that our government has asked networks not to broadcast bin-Laden videos for fear they contained instructions, yet this broadcast contains the most specific and frighteningly accurate instructions, to date, directed at killing large numbers of our soldiers, and it was practically heralded by government officials.

Anyway....

Vest notes that quality and morale of ground fighting forces and officers have decreased markedly over the past few years.

Maj. Donald Vandergriff, author of last year's critical personnel and doctrinal study The Path to Victory,[says personnel policy for midlevel officers] essentially amounts to "bribing people to stay, buying their loyalty, patriotism and moral strength to go in harm's way, based on the dehumanizing assumption that our officers and NCOs are mindless, undifferentiated, replaceable cogs in a machine."

Gentry’s critique also warns of the underreliance on strong human training and attention:

Gentry ... draws attention to the recent Defense Department planning document Joint Vision 2020. ... “[It]'s the epitome of simple arrogance.... [Technology] has little applicability ...sensors cannot identify human motives, measure human emotions, quantify the coherence of human organizations, or assess the importance of the data they gather. ...[Troops] must acquire adequate background knowledge and understanding of their areas of responsibility before they deploy in order to be able to convert the incremental bits that their sensors give them into useful information."

Bin Laden too felt that human ability was lacking in the force he faced.

We recognised after fighting and defending ourselves from the American enemy that it depends on its fighting mainly in psychological war for the huge propaganda machine it has, and it also depends on the heavy air bombing. America uses these two in order to hide its soldiers' weaknesses....Despite ... heavy shelling [at Tora Bora],... they (American soldiers) turned back carrying their killed and injured soldiers. The American troops couldn't dare to invade our bases, which indicates ... the false myths they spread concerning their military capabilities.

One need not agree with his baiting invective against the character of our soldiers or accept the wrongfulness and failure of our fight against him to realize that he has hit correctly upon weaknesses in tactical training, weaknesses that can used as here to improve enemy morale. The proof is in the facts. He is, after all, apparently still alive and free and troublemaking.

Vest notes that critics see that hi-tech emphasis in the military, along with supply and training problems, can backfire, especially in an urban setting:

For a military that, in the context of Iraq and beyond, is likely to face urban warfare and subsequent low-intensity conflict in cities and mountains sans adequate training, wonder weapons, and networked surveillance/communications systems may not only be lacking; they could even be exploitable weaknesses.

Bin-Laden is frighteningly and directly hip again about where to hit:

The enemy fears the most the town fights and street fights. Such fighting would cause the enemy huge losses of souls.

Vest finds alot of officers uncomfortable with our plans for a post-invasion Iraq:

While the Iraqi people may initially respond to the deposing of Saddam Hussein and his clique with euphoria, many officers do not expect a quick or easy transition to anything resembling stability or democracy; indeed, some who have made a close study of the region anticipate "spheres of simultaneous civil conflict all over Iraq," as one put it, that will tax resources as well as US public opinion.

Those fears might prove correct, as a gruesome bin-Laden doctrine sits in cheerful ambush for our ill-advised Iraq adventure:

So Muslims in general and Iraq in particular must pull up your pants legs for jihad against this unjust campaign [against Iraq].

But what should happen in the event of an American victory? Bin-Laden’s setback? Hardly, bin-Laden is unfazed, even eager, and plans a South Lebanon/West Bank for American GIs, as he addresses Iraqis and others who will follow him:

You should also keep the ammunitions and weapons, as it is an obligatory mission. We stress the importance of martyrdom operations against the enemy, these attacks that have scared Americans and Israelis like never before.

Indeed prior experience shows we have no clear policy on how to govern others wisely. And that may earn bin-Laden the recruits he needs for a barbaric insurgency in Iraq and elsewhere. Vest reports:

A high-ranking British officer who did a tour with NATO [says], "All the US written orders and briefings I got treated the whole of Bosnia as bandit country...with the end result being, the GIs on the ground treated it like the Wild West with Indians behind every bush; their weapons were always at the ready, even when they talked to the natives, which was a very antagonistic stance. If anything ...the locals in areas under US control viewed the GIs as imperial occupiers....”

What a trap Iraq will prove if that is the attitude going in, and it is likely to be as we are still in a psychological post- 9/11 “payback” mind-set. And Iraq is wildly unpredictable even by Yugoslav standards. If the precedent the British officer provides continues, how many Iraqis and others will fall prey to bin-Laden’s siren-song and become GI-killing “martyrs” for his clash of civilizations doctrine of endless war? He gives them a pre-fab articulated grievance that our behavior may not fail to overcome:

We are following with utmost concern the Crusaders' preparations to occupy the former capital of Islam (Baghdad), loot the fortunes of the Muslims and install a puppet regime on you that follows its masters in Washington...

Well, it's one thing to walk unknowingly into an ambush but it appears we are going in, eyes knowingly wide shut.

PS -- BTW, have you got this bin-Laden guy yet, Mr. President? I campaigned for you, ya know.

2003-02-19T16:51:00.000-05:00

Green-Eyed At West Point? In an otherwise interesting and useful article at the Nation, the following sentence appears: "[T]here's a smaller group {of military people} that believes political leaders, instead of really addressing problems and resource issues, are going to go out and empire-grab and disguise it as something else so we can feed a warped version of the American dream, in which we continue to consume more resources and produce more waste, rather than really struggle with what it takes to keep the American dream viable and inspirational in a world of 6 billion people." Isn't it convenient that these dissenters exactly mouth Green rhetoric and that the Nation has found them? While I am not surprised to hear of Empire skeptics in the military (thank God), this sounds a little bit wishful-thinkingish.

2003-02-14T17:45:00.000-05:00

INAUGURAL RIBBON-CUTTING POST

PRODUCT PLACEMENT BLOGGING. I inaugurate my long-delayed blog by introducing to bloggery what may be a new concept, yet one designed to address the great blogger uber-complaint: the complete absence of money in blogging. For many bloggers this absence of income extends to their non-blog life.

Now, conventional advertisement is a problem because it is distracting, especially in the form of pop-up ads. So I submit the new concept for the benefit of all. A means of non-distracting income generation from web-log scrivening:

Product Placement Blogging!

Many have heard of the practice of consumer product manufacturers paying to have their product displayed or mentioned in a movie or on TV: movie shots of Times Square with the famous Coke sign flashing, or scenes where a pack of cigarettes is suddenly pulled out, label hugely legible. It’s called product placement.

So why can’t we import this into cyberia? (Perhaps it is already being done and I don’t know it yet.)

Think of it, marketers out there, the entire blogworld, the infinite Internet, being reminded again and again of your product as the denizens of geekdom pop off on a pet dismal subject:

“The need to act came to me while sipping a ___{your beverage product here!}___ at my computer table, wondering how soon I could start up my ____{your brand vehicle here!}___ in order to go down to the protest .”

“I have often wondered about the separation of church and state. While dining the other day at __{your eatery here!}___ I began to oppose faith-based charities and their funding. Many good books like {your book here!}__ explaining why you should oppose it too can be found at __{your Greek mythology-South American waterway-inspired non-sequitur URL here!}__.com.”

“Poetry has never been the same since Keats. The other day I took a trip to London, having bought my tickets through ___{your on-line travel discount service here!}___.”

Bloggers themselves can get incestuously into the game:

“Boy, that Glenn Reynolds {or your blog here!} really can make a point. Even when I disagree I see why they call him Instapundit {or your own clever blog name here!}.”

Even causes and special interests can chip in to product placement blogging:

“The country is going to hell! In a handbasket! And they have brought us to this. They won’t give up until we’re all screwed. Yes, it’s all because of the __{insert your hated group here}.”

Each reference would of course include a link to the product or service’s website, or any other site where the product, service, or cause can be purchased or funded.

But that mention and link will only come for a steep price, of course. Measured in hard dollars, and soft integrity.

Done.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

ABOUT ME. Oh, the obligatory “about me”.

About me are some clothes, a desk, and a pile of books. (For specific mention of the designers/authors, manufacturers may email me with bids.)

Which anyway all reminds of an old “guy line” -- try it, it usually works ... if one or both of you are in a severely altered state of consciousness:

Guy to Gal: You know what I like about you?

Gal: What?

Guy: My arms. {throw arms around her}

She’ll think it’s so cute that by the time she recovers you’re already there.

Or you’ll get kicked in the crotch and sued for sexual harassment (do NOT try on employees), but at least you tried, man, and face it, that’s all that counts.

Done.

2003-02-04T21:23:00.000-05:00

Still trying to figure this out.

2002-11-02T01:08:00.000-05:00

Hmm....now how do I control the side of the page?

2002-09-26T17:56:00.000-04:00

Hello blog world, this is a test. This is not an actual emergency, if it had been, you wouldn't have wasted time reading or writing this.

By the way, where WAS the Emergency Broadcast System on September 11, 2001?