Category Archives: Free Speech

UPDATED: Fee-Fi-Fo-Fems (Who Smell The Blood Of A Racist)

Free Speech, Gender, libertarianism, Propaganda, Race, Racism, Reason

“You’re a racist.” “No, you’re a bigger racist.” “No way; you hang out with Lew Rockwell, Hans Hoppe and Ron Paul; they’re racists, so you’re racist.” What on earth is going on here? Why are serious libertarians engaging in tit-for-tat spats with a twat? She is Cathy something or another, a sally-come-lately libertarian. Justin Raimondo, a life-long libertarian, has been credited with “smoking out” this woman—who has libeled Paul, Murray Rothbard, Rockwell and Hoppe as racists.

Are libertarians as dazed and confused as Republicans? The latter have certainly dignified the rival gang’s Stalinist show-trial tactics, partaking in the same silly tit-for-tat: “You’re a racist, I’m not. Democrats are racists; we’re the party of Lincoln.” Blah-blah.

And what will Mr. Raimondo do if the bimbo in question produces some “iffy” quotes from the men she has maligned, quotes that fail the politically correct test?

Libertarians should not partake in this dance done by the political establishment. By going on the defense—allowing themselves to be drawn into such a deeply silly exchange—libertarians are, inadvertently, conceding that speech should be policed, and that those who violate standards set by the PC set are somehow defective on those grounds alone, and deserve to be purged from “polite” company.

(Incidentally, allow me some latitude here when it comes to the liberal use of ad hominem, having already proven, I hope, that Cathy Whatshername is the dim bulb she is. It was hoped that “Libertarian Feminists Make A Move On Von Mises” would have provided “brutalists” with a temporary reprieve from her ilk. Alas, this is the “Age of the Idiot.” You can’t keep ‘em down for long.)

JUNGE FREIHEIT, a German weekly, recently interviewed this writer. One of the questions was this: “Have you been blamed for racism because of your book “Into the Cannibal’s Pot”? What would you answer?”

The reply, taken almost verbatim from “Into the Cannibal’s Pot” (pp. 41-42), ought to help in warding off the fee-fi-fo-fems who sniff out the blood of speech offenders and thought criminals:

No, not really. The book is concerned with reality, not race. Res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself). Most intelligent readers can tell the difference. One individual from Media Matters failed, but he could hardly be called intelligent. In order to accuse me of racism, he needed to lie about what I had written. My answer to those who’d fault me for daring to make broad statements about aggregate group characteristics, vis-à-vis crime, for instance, would be as follows: Generalizations, provided they are substantiated by hard evidence, not hunches, are not incorrect. Science relies on the ability to generalize to the larger population observations drawn from a representative sample. People make prudent decisions in their daily lives based on probabilities and generalities. That one chooses not to live in a particular crime-riddled county or country in no way implies that one considers all individual residents there to be criminals, only that a sensible determination has been made, based on statistically significant data, as to where scarce and precious resources—one’s life and property—are best invested.

UPDATE (5/11): Comments harvested from the Facebook thread:

Jack Kerwick (Catholic, conservative philosopher): “‘Tit-for-tat spats with a twat.’ Vintage Ilana.”

Ilana Mercer: “From the fact that some dude is dumber than Cathy Whatshername, it doesn’t follow that CWHN is smart, Christoph Dollis. The Jeffrey Tucker I once knew was way too bright to have written the crap I critiqued in “Libertarian Feminists Make A Move On Von Mises”. Cathy Whatshername is the ‘brains’ behind it. The woman is the SE Cupp of lite libertarianism.”

The adorable Kathy Shaidle: “Libertarians should not partake in this dance done by the political establishment. By going on the defense—allowing themselves to be drawn into such a deeply silly exchange—libertarians are, inadvertently, conceding that speech should be policed, and that those who violate standards set by the PC set are somehow defective on those grounds alone, and deserve to be purged from ‘polite’ company.” (From the post above)

Exactly. Many so called libertarians just seem like low tax liberals whose big priority is getting to smoke dope without a helmet, and who have bought into the fashioable leftwing “multiculural/race/gender/transphobia” narrative. No thanks.

Ilana Mercer: “The inimitable Dr. Hans-Hermann Hoppe once told me: ‘If you are not called a racist, then, it seems to me, you are in intellectual trouble and it is high time to reconsider your own thinking.’ Professor Hoppe was attempting to console me, after someone marked us both with that Mark of Cain”.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

The Elephant In The Pistorius Courtroom

Crime, Free Speech, Left-Liberalism, Political Correctness, Propaganda, Race, Racism, South-Africa, Sport

Now on WND is “The Elephant In The Pistorius Courtroom,” in which I speak to philosopher Dan Roodt, Ph.D., about two recent show trials: that of blade-runner Oscar Pistorius and that of the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, Donald Sterling. Dr. Roodt is a noted Afrikaner activist, author, literary critic and director of PRAAG. He is the author of the polemical essay, “The Scourge of the ANC.”

An excerpt:

ILANA MERCER: “There’s an elephant in the courtroom in which Oscar Pistorius is being tried for the murder of girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. It is the unidirectional, black-on-black and black-on-white violent crime in South Africa. The fear of being butchered was likely behind the blade runner’s irrational, irresponsible actions. I had hoped that Pistorius would speak up. For all his privilege, Pistorius knows the rapacity and invincibility of the criminal class in his country. Like every other Afrikaner, he knew in his gut what infiltrating gangs would do to a legless Boer. The world is praising the proceedings in that court. However, “making sport of a caged animal that has confessed” is how a South African reader described this Colosseum. What do you think?

DAN ROODT: I largely agree with that. One of the columnists on our Praag.org site described the trial as a “canned hunt and a legal travesty.” Most people watching it probably do not know that only 8 percent of murder cases in South Africa result in a conviction, so killers have a 92 percent chance of literally getting away with murder! South Africa is both the murder and especially the rape capital of the world. Usually the statistics are massaged in such a way that only murder proper, called “first-degree murder” in the United States, is included in the absolute number of murders. But if one also counts other homicides with a lesser culpability, we are the world champions, even above India’s 43,000 homicides. But, of course, India has over 1 billion people, whereas we have just over 50 million. Even for first-degree murder, we have more of those per year (16,000) than the U.S. (14,000) which has six times our population.

Regarding the court procedures, Pistorius is spending a lot of money on his legal team and the state is using an experienced Afrikaner prosecutor, Gerrie Nel. However, there has been large-scale affirmative action applied to the appointment of judges, so that many of them lack the knowledge of the law and the experience to do their job properly. In many cases, black offenders, especially, get off very lightly and in practice do not serve more than ten years for first-degree murder.

The government is also applying pressure on lawyers to apply affirmative action in their own ranks as most of the top-level senior lawyers or advocates, as we call them, are still white. …”

Read the rest. “The Elephant In The Pistorius Courtroom” is now on WND.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Which Is The Worst Mouthpiece Of Propaganda?

Free Speech, Individual Rights, Media, Russia, The State

It’s not RT TV. Russia Today reports openly and extensively on assorted proposals to restrict freedoms throughout Russia as well as on existing restrictions in that country:

“Moscow magistrate convict Russian nationalist of extremism” tells of restrictions and bans imposed by the Moscow City Court on an individual whose activities are viewed as “extreme.”

More headlines exposing illiberal restrictions: “Russia may criminalize multi-ethnic fights between individuals,” which is also silly. It is already naturally unlawful in almost all criminal codes to attack another individual unprovoked. This latest Russian proposal is just a species of the hate-crime legislation endured in Europe and throughout the Anglo-sphere.

Another of today’s RT headlines: “Opposition party proposes 5 year jail term for insulting patriotism.”

Social engineering is par for the course in the US, except that American leaders incentivize values in opposition to the traditional values Putin seems after:

“New Family Code to protect traditional family, religious values – key lawmaker.” The Russian “head of the lower house committee for family issues has described a new set of legislative amendments protecting the values shared by basic religions, and inspiring young people to choose marriage over cohabitation”:

Other possible changes could include outlining priorities in favor of traditional families and traditional family values. These include the concepts that have been supporting the Russian nation for over a thousand years – the union between a man and a woman, several children in a family, families uniting several generations and the deep connection between these generations.

Either way, shaping society in politically pleasing ways is not the role of the state.

Back to the point of the post: RT covers quite well what we in the US would and should consider the state’s encroachment on liberty.

Can you say the same about mainstream media stateside?

MORE.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

US Fascism Rising: 46th Best Country For Journalistic Freedoms

Fascism, Free Speech, Journalism, Media

Via The Wire: “The United States took a nasty drop in the World Press Freedom rankings, released on Wednesday by the media group Reporters Without Borders, falling 14 spots to the 46th best country for journalist freedoms. Of the 180 countries ranked, the home of the First Amendment now sits snuggled between Romania and Haiti.”

The U.S.’s jump in last year’s rankings was dismissed at the time as “deceptive progress,” and true to form, America has fallen back down the list. The rankings report blame the U.S.’s drop on its wide-ranging crackdown on whistleblowers, particularly Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning (who got a 35-year sentence for leaking documents), and the attempted 105-year sentence for Barrett Brown. To the American government, “The whistleblower is the enemy,” the report writes. Similarly, the subpoena of Associated Press phone records contributed to that drastic drop.

MORE.

I am a tad surprised at the pass the UK gets. Via RT:

RWB did not considered the most recent revelation about British intelligence, found practicing not just spying but actively using cyber-attacks to deal with such information disseminators as Anonymous and LulzSec hacktivists, or that global media watchdogs are planning to investigate press freedom in the UK.

Also, Glenn Greenwald’s revelations about UK and US mainstream media being “devoted servants” of the intelligence agencies seemingly have not affected the rating.

Meanwhile WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is still trapped in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, with the freedom of information campaigner still being pursued by UK and Swedish justice.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

UPDATED: WND & EPJ: Unfettered Market-Place Of Ideas (Knockout Reporting)

Free Markets, Free Speech, Journalism, libertarianism, Media, Private Property

THE WND EDITORIAL SPREAD SHOWCASES the site’s tradition of good, vibrant debate. Like it or not, WND is always at the forefront of journalism. Has been since the late 1990s. No censorship, no party-line to toe; just an unfettered market-place of ideas.

The caption places my weekly column’s case that, “Firearms are meant for self-defense, not needless killing”—a case that, if anything, bolsters the 2nd Amendment and the absolute right to self-defense—against Jeff Knox’s utilitarian argument for Esau’s way.

HuntWNDCapture

The libertarian equivalent of WND is Robert Wenzel’s lively EPJ. Robert is another editor who knows how to mix it up.

UPDATE: WND was first to “document [the] hundreds of examples of the Knockout Game around the country over the last two years.” Now Fox News is taking credit for being first to do journalistic diligence to this story. Not so.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

UPDATED: Don’t Clown With The Clown-in-Chief

Barack Obama, Free Speech, Political Correctness, Race, Republicans, The State, The Zeitgeist

A dapper Erik Rush, my pal and colleague at WND, was on “Hannity” to unpack the crazed reaction to the rodeo clown’s “spoofing” of Obama at the Missouri State Fair. Missouri State Fair fired the poor guy. Pathetic!

Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder, a Republican, tweeted out his disgust and disapproval (or rather, was eager for his followers to witness his moral outrage). Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill, a moron in her own right, puled that, “The young Missourians who witnessed this stunt learned exactly the wrong lesson about political discourse—that somehow it’s ever acceptable to, in a public event, disrespect, taunt, and joke about harming the president of our great nation.”

WRONG. The youngins learned the right lesson. Peggy Noonan enunciated the lesson, if too mildly:

… as the noted political philosopher Orson Welles once put it: “It’s the business of the American people to take the mickey out of the president.” It’s not only what we do, it’s what we should do. Welles was speaking on a talk show; it was the 1970s; he was talking about people making fun of some Republican president, Nixon or Ford. So what? They can take it. And they’re not kings.

UPDATE: “The lies that bind: Obama’s race strategy” by Erik Rush.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint