Category Archives: Kids

UPDATED (6/19/017): Destination North Korea? I Don’t Think So

Family, Foreign Policy, Kids, Left-Liberalism, Multiculturalism

Liberal parents are a liability. One way to avoid brain damage is to refrain from touring North Korea while American. The other is having parents who tell you not to tour North Korea while American. Poor Otto Warmbier. Someone let him down.
I mean, who financed or encouraged his trip to North Korea? Sheer madness. Even if parents have no control over kids, they still have an obligation to give kids “The Talk.” Did these parents even tell this poor lad, now dead after his ordeal in North Korea (6/19/017), anything but to follow his heart? I’m curious. I may be wrong and Otto Warmbier would not listen to reason, but I’ve seen enough of American liberal naivete.

June 19, 2017: RIP, Poor Otto:

Finally, an answer to nagging questions: “While researching his studies in China, Mr Warmbier found out about Chinese companies that offer trips to North Korea. His parents were okay with his decision to go [to North Korea].”

The Third Degree à la Germany: Answering To Junge Freiheit

Europe, General, Ilana Mercer, Kids, The Zeitgeist

A change of pace for a change. “The Third Degree à la Germany” is the current column. It’s Junge Freiheit’s personalities-from-abroad questionnaire, now on The Unz Review (where, as in Germany, some got the humor. Townhall.com not so much). An excerpt:

Junge Freiheit is Germany’s finest weekly newspaper. It’s easily its only authentically rightist, freedom-loving, classically liberal publication. When Junge Freiheit’s editors come calling; this writer is always happy to oblige—and not only because my weekly column once appeared in JF. But also because, present company excepted, the young editors at JF are simply the kindest, most professional journalists I’ve encountered. What was it that Oscar Wilde said about kindness? “She thought that because he was stupid he would be kindly, when of course, kindliness requires imagination and intellect.” Having just emerged from a 15-year-long, abusive, professional relationship; kindness and courtesy are indeed new and lovely things to behold.

However, my Teutonic editor lit a fire under me. I was asked to make haste in answering Junge Freiheit’s personalities-from-abroad questionnaire, for the November 11 issue. You’re in good company was his matter-of-fact message. But get to it.

The company: Nigel Farage (author of Brexit), Eric Burdon (rock-and-roll legend), Douglas Murray (famous neoconservative), Lord Christopher Monckton (politician and inventor), Thomas Drake (Whistleblower), Colin Crouch (author of “Postdemocracy”), Frederick Forsyth (bestselling author), Charlie Duke (Apollo 11 and Apollo 16 astronaut), Tony Sheridan (early Beatles), etc.

The record time for answering the JF questionnaire: six minutes. Needless to say, I failed miserably to beat it.

JUNGE FREIHEIT: Where would you like to be at this very moment?

ILANA MERCER: I‘m strictly reality oriented. I don’t indulge in make-believe. I don’t wish to be where I’m not. …

… Read the rest. “The Third Degree à la Germany,”  Junge Freiheit’s personalities-from-abroad questionnaire, is now on The Unz Review.

JUNGE FREIHEIT, z.Hd. Christian Dorn, Hohenzollerndamm 27 A, 10713 Berlin, GERMANY, November 11 issue, page 27.

A Youth’s Ignorance About Me, Islam & Ground Zero Of Private Property

Islam, Kids, Left-Liberalism, libertarianism, Political Philosophy, Private Property

To my post “Should A Vocal, Veteran Critic Of Islam ‘Conference’ In Turkey?,” the Libertarian Alliance’s Keir Martland offers the response of a patronizing youth, who has not read one word of the (analytical) writing done by this writer regarding Islam, over the years, aforementioned in the rhetorically titled post (aka “The Islam In the Room”).

Keir Martland’s reply can be distilled thus in its “substance” (there is nothing more to it):

“There, there, little woman, you are safe in Turkey. Every Muslim I met in Turkey was nice. The place is safe because I felt safe and say so.”

Well then. That settles it, doesn’t it?? (I said why the place was likely safe for the rest, but not for me.)

In his arrogance and condescension, Martland, moreover, appears to compare me, a longtime anti-war writer (see “The Curious Case Of WND’s Vanishing, Veteran Paleolibertarian” for similar flippancy), to the “bomb them back to the Stone Age” crowd. This, when he’s not deluding himself that an Islamic activist would bother to target him (who??), in the same way the Islamist would target me.

“I never once felt in danger or unwelcome either in Turkey,” Martland promises solipsistically.

A 20-something youth with practically no writings on the topic, Islam (and a condescending attitude toward those who’ve been thinking closely and writing publicly about the topic for ages), has nothing to fear from Islamists. (Surely being a conservative-libertarian should warrant a more realistic self-appraisal? Paleolibertarians are supposed to respect hierarchy, when earned.)

Martland’s flight of fancy is as though I were to imagine that my profile on matters Islam is like that of Robert Spencer or Andrew Bostom. While my political prescriptions, as a paleolibertarian, diverge from theirs considerably (not that Martland has bothered to discern that; he writes about my perspective from studied ignorance); as scholars, they know Islam better than I, are known by the Islamic world and are, consequently, targeted by it.

However, I certainly know how to apply my paleolibertarianism to the realities of Islam, better than this youngster (who’s done none of the work and is clearly ignorant about the “uncharitable views” he imputes to me and pontificates about).

More vapor from Martland:

Even if I did hold such views [presumably as mercer does] I would like to think that I wouldn’t turn down an opportunity to spend a week at the King David Hotel, hosted by a charming Jewish couple, with a hundred of the most radical libertarians in the world.

As he attends a conference informed by private property, the boy still fails to grasp the totally rational reason for my decision not to go to Turkey. Martland shows himself incapable of grasping what should be ground zero for a propertarian: the conservation of one’s prime real estate, one’s life.

Basically, emotion being Martland’s framework, he conflates my not going to Turkey to “conference,” with an insult to Hans Hoppe (whom I love). It totally escapes Martland that the prime consideration for me is making prudent decisions based on conservation of scarce—nay, irreplaceable—private property: my corporeal self.

And Martland, you are radical only in your own MIND. A Golda-Meir zinger comes to mind. It’s a relic from a time when false humility was at least still practiced: “Don’t be so humble, you’re not that great.”

As to Martland’s King David Hotel allusion. It could very well be random, but, to someone who knows the historical baggage, and has lived through a few wars in Israel (as chronicled in the 2003 column, “BETRAYING BRAVE BOYS”), the reference comes off as though our youth has just learned, in his history class, about the blowing-up of the King David Hotel during the British Mandate, and he thinks he can leverage it oh-so cleverly in making a parallel point.

“I understand that you have your views on Islam, just as I might – for supposition’s sake – have uncharitable views about Judaism and the Jews,” Martland intones sanctimoniously (stupidly, too, as he demonstrates zero knowledge about my views, at least he show no familiarity with them in his feelings-based post. And given his penchant for feelings-based woffle, I would not trust Martland to grapple honestly with my views on Islam).

So says a boy with little life experience, to say nothing of experience living in hotbeds of Islam as this writer has (mind you, these days Britain is more dangerous than Israel, where I grew up). So says a youth who’s written practically nothing meaningful about one of the defining issues of the day: the Western State as the enabler of Islam and its fractious faithful.

Also bandied about elsewhere in connection with my post, “Should A Vocal, Veteran Critic Of Islam ‘Conference’ In Turkey?”, is the pejorative Islamophobia. That’s of a piece with the Hillary nomenclature; the Left’s accusations of thought crimes are accompanied with a slew of big words to describe thought criminals. Now libertarians are getting in on the Left’s vile act.

Yes, in a conference about the sanctity of private property, Keir has thought not at all about the corporeal self, the starting point of private property. He then lectures me about “the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists [being] a vile group of cultural Marxists, not some brave freedom-fighters” (not that the two are mutually exclusive, but logic is not Keir Martland’s thing).

This is a common talking point—the Charlie Hebdo characters being leftist scum. It’s old hat. We’re all agreed long ago (probably before our second-hander was born), and, as usual, the aspect was covered in The Charlie Hebdo Hypocrites. Sure. We all hate the Hebdoites (although we do not want them dead; unless it’s life voluntarily taken in suicide). But the aim—mine, at least—is NOT TO END UP LIKE THEM (DEAD).

The cherry on the cake is when Martlan goes off the logical reservation completely. If you can stand the smugness:

I also hope that, if the Mises Institute was to put on a lavish conference in Bible Belt Alabama, hosted by for example Gary North, I would not turn it down for fear of encountering views and people with whom I profoundly disagree.

Not only does Martlan misunderstand whence private property originates (see above), but so, too, does he misconstrue the extension of the argument from self-preservation:

I will not go to Turkey, not because I disagree with Islam, but because, in my assessment, my life is not as safe or protected as it should be (unless the heroic Martlan gets some assault rifle training or hires Pamela Geller’s security detail; how gauche of me).

The comparison drawn between America’s Bible Belt (a hotbed of Christian terrorism) and Turkey I will not dignify. This crap has been given more coverage than it/he deserves.

An Ode To Paul Ryan By MSNBC’s Left-Liberal Lawrence O’Donnell

Bush, Constitution, Donald Trump, Government, Kids, Left-Liberalism, Media, Natural Law, Republicans

Oh what natural bedfellows these fleas make and how they love The People. I’m talking about the Left and the left-leaning “Right” of our political and media establishment.

Last week, MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell practically glorified House Speaker Paul Ryan for, as he put it, “giving little Donald Trump his first a major kindergarten lesson in government during a meeting on Capitol Hill, putting into perspective how hard it will be for Trump to pass his outrageous legislative agenda.”

Ryan was the best and smartest Republican negotiator [code for shyster] in D.C.; Trump the worst, exalted statist O’Donnell.

Note how O’Donnell frames the right thing—naturally right thing to do—as ignorant, “magic thinking. “Ryan has been dealing with children like Trump for years,” intones this pompous member of the ruling class, in reference to Tea Party fiscal impulses and Trump Nation inclinations.

Lawrence thinks the good kind of power comes from the Law and from The Constitution, rather than from The People heeding the natural law. Naturally, to O’Donnell, Ryan, a mere boy, is the adult in the room. Trump, a man of the world, who’s built stuff, is the child, sitting at the feet of legislator-cum-apostle Paul, lapping up his wisdom.

It’s simple. If Trump doesn’t fulfill his promises, just as Barack Obama did through Executive decrees (which most certainly are in the overreaching U.S. Constitution), through brute force; he’ll be a one-term president. The Constitution is a dead letter. Has been for a long time.

Besides, “The Constitution has saddled Americans with a very strong presidency, should he choose to act on the veto it grants him. Buried in the constitutional thickets, concedes historian Paul Johnson, are “huge powers.” The American president “was much stronger than most kings of the day, rivaled or exceeded only by the ‘Great Autocrat,’ the Tsar of Russia (and in practice stronger than most tsars). These powers were not explored until Andrew Jackson’s time, half a century on, when they astonished and frightened many people.”

See “The Sovereign Agrees To … A Bourbon Summit.”