Monthly Archives: June 2012

UPDATED (1/18/018): “Department Of Fatherland Security” & The SPLC

Free Speech, Homeland Security, Propaganda, Race, Racism, The State

Thomas DiLorenzo exposes the revenue-rich, “racial racketeering” of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) by going to The Source of its funding, “The Department of Fatherland Security, and probably other parts of the bureaucracy.” The SPLC’s latest Mandate: “to ‘educate’ police on the ‘dangers’ posed by all of us critics of unlimited government interventionism.”

MORE at LRC.COM. (I love the “Department of Fatherland Security” coinage.)

UPDATE (1/18/018):

Guys Do Double Duty For Feminist Delusions

Economy, Feminism, Gender, Labor, Political Correctness, Propaganda, Pseudoscience, Reason, Republicans

“Guys Do Double Duty For Feminist Delusions” is the new weekly column, now on RT. Here is an excerpt:

“A dual spigot for an exterior faucet”: We purchased this item at Home Depot, the shop where men roam to feel at home.

The item was without a sticker. A woman clerk was manning the checkout counter. She and her female colleagues congregated to solve the problem. A man at the back was contacted on the intercom system and asked for a price. Alas, and eventually, another man had to save the day. Not one of the ladies was able to coherently describe the 2-outlet faucet adaptor, for the purpose of pricing the item.

A young man who worked the floor staged an “intervention.” He arrived on the scene, held the thing comfortably in his hands, and intuitively blurted out the description above. It was second nature to him. A minute or so later, we were finally on our way.

No doubt, this youngster’s female coworkers on the Home Depot floor would describe the task they just failed to execute as one demanding “equal pay.”

In reality, this anonymous, symbolic guy is worth much more to his employers than the gals. If his bosses did not fear a class-action lawsuit from his always watchful female coworkers, the man would be paid commensurate with his worth to the company; or his productivity.

Yes, that young man is more productive than his female colleagues in delivering the service that is Home Depot’s stock-in-trade. He saves customers time (and time is money). And much more.

Everywhere you go, men are enabling—and compensating for—female incompetence in work to which women are unsuited.

Everywhere, men are doing double duty, sometimes endangering themselves (as in police work), to give girls the delusions of grandeur they demand. And they do this without question. I guess a guy doing unequal work for equal pay would get fired if he questioned this PC protocol. …

Inveighing against “income disparity between men and women,” House Minority Leader (who should seldom be taken seriously), had said this …

Read the rest of “Guys Do Double Duty For Feminist Delusions,” now on RT.

If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive libertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

Support this writer’s work by clicking to “Recommend,” “Tweet” and “Share” “Return To Reason” on WND, and the “Paleolibertarian Column” on RT.

The paperback edition (softcover) of “Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa” is out and in stock. It features bonus material, including an Afterword by Burkean philosopher and rising star, Jack Kerwick, Ph.D.

Please LIKE “The Cannibal” on Amazon as well as on Facebook, and contribute your review of the paperback edition.

UPDATE II: Just Another Mouth In The Republican Fellatio Machine (Ad Hominem)

Celebrity, Critique, Feminism, Individual Rights, Intellectualism, Journalism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media, Politics, Pop-Culture, Republicans

The column “Just Another Mouth In the Republican Fellatio Machine,” debuts on Taki’s Magazine today. Here is an excerpt:

“The symbolic thrust of Hustler’s crude, much protested, photo-shopped depiction of Rockefeller Republican S.E. Cupp is commendable: silence this siren of stupidity.

The Hustler make-believe image of Cupp was captioned incorrectly, describing the ‘conservative’ commentator as ‘someone who had read too much Ayn Rand in high school and ended up joining the dark side.’

Sacrilege. If S. E. Cupp has read Rand’s works, she has internalized none of it.

The problem with the product (or production) called Cupp is not that it is conservative and is being victimized for heralding conservative truths. This was the tired tack adopted by almost all the rightists who’ve rushed to Cupp’s rescue.

On the contrary. Cupp is no conservative. Like a lot of loud idiots, Cupp lacks a coherent ideology.

Dumb distaff abound on America’s news channels. Cupp is a leader of the pack, a luminary in the Age of the Idiot, rivaled only by Grand Old Party leading lights such as Margaret Hoover and Gretchen Carlson (Bill O’Reilly’s circus clowns, aka the “Culture Warriors”), Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Carrie Prejean, Noelle Nikpour, and Dana Perino (the Heidi Klum of the commentariat).

Like these low-watt women, Lolita’s forte is to gesture wildly and grimace, while parroting talking points disgorged by every other Bush bootlicker before her. …”

… To find out why (in this column’s opinion) “‘Big Media,’ Left and Right, came together unequivocally to defend the dishonored S.E. Cupp (who has been honored for her vomitous prose on C-SPAN’s Book TV, and was called on to speak at CPUKE 2012),” read “Just Another Mouth In the Republican Fellatio Machine,” now on Taki’s Magazine.

It goes without saying that you should click to “Recommend,” “Tweet” and “Share” the Taki’s column. Or register your discontent at the Comments Section after the column.

UPDATE I: A reader at Taki’s writes this, which is completely true. I was thinking of exactly how O’Reilly avoids Coulter like the plague, because she can’t help but make him look unintelligent (I don’t think O’Reilly is stupid, and he can certainly be very funny, but he has nothing on Coulter’s intelligence, whatever else you think of her.)

“A completely TRUE article. I actually agree with every bit of it. CUPPCAKE goes on O’Reilly and I get the impression his avuncular patronizing of her means …he’s boning her. Coulter goes on, and Billo nitpicks at her like a grandma. He’s jealous of Coulter.”

UPDATE II: The one ad hominem leveled at me at Taki’s Comments Section is that I’m jealous of the Cupp creature (as if that constitutes an argument). That doesn’t square. Why would I be jealous of the half wit, but not of Coutler and Malkin (who are attractive and smart too, surely)? It shows you how far the ad hominem argument will take you. No where at all.

UPDATED: The Philosophy of Liberty (The Claims Of Kids)

Individual Rights, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, libertarianism, Liberty, Media, Objectivism

Accolades are owed to a team that has rendered the philosophy of liberty in the simplest, purest of ways, to better popularize it. Ken Schoolland distilled liberty in words, and Lux Lucre (a very Randian label, given that lucre means money or profits) produced the animation. Watch it. Read it.

“The philosophy of liberty is based on the principle of self-ownership. You own your life. To deny this is to imply that another person has a higher claim on your life than you do. No other person, or group of persons, owns your life nor do you own the lives of others. You exist in time: future, present, and past. This is manifest in life, liberty, and the product of your life and liberty. The exercise of choices over life and liberty is your prosperity. To lose your life is to lose your future. To lose your liberty is to lose your present. And to lose the product of your life and liberty is to lose the portion of your past that produced it.
A product of your life and liberty is your property. Property is the fruit of your labour, the product of your time, energy, and talents. It is that part of nature that you turn to valuable use. And it is the property of others that is given to you by voluntary exchange and mutual consent. Two people who exchange property voluntarily are both better off or they wouldn’t do it. Only they may rightfully make that decision for themselves.
At times some people use force or fraud to take from others without wilful, voluntary consent. Normally, the initiation of force to take life is murder, to take liberty is slavery, and to take property is theft. It is the same whether these actions are done by one person acting alone, by the many acting against a few, or even by officials with fine hats and fancy titles.
You have the right to protect your own life, liberty, and justly acquired property from the forceful aggression of others. So you may rightfully ask others to help protect you. But you do not have a right to initiate force against the life, liberty, or property of others. Thus, you have no right to designate some person to initiate force against others on your behalf.
You have a right to seek leaders for yourself, but would have no right to impose rulers on others. No matter how officials are selected, they are only human beings and they have no rights or claims that are higher than those of any other human beings. Regardless of the imaginative labels for their behaviour or the numbers of people encouraging them, officials have no right to murder, to enslave, or to steal. You cannot give them any rights that you do not have yourself.
Since you own your life, you are responsible for your life. You do not rent your life from others who demand your obedience. Nor are you a slave to others who demand your sacrifice.
You choose your own goals based on your own values. Success and failure are both the necessary incentives to learn and to grow.
Your action on behalf of others, or their action on behalf of you, is only virtuous when it is derived from voluntary, mutual consent. For virtue can only exist when there is free choice.
This is the basis of a truly free society. It is not only the most practical and humanitarian foundation for human action; it is also the most ethical.
Problems that arise from the initiation of force by government have a solution. The solution is for people of the world to stop asking officials to initiate force on their behalf. Evil does not arise only from evil people, but also from good people who tolerate the initiation of force as a means to their own ends. In this manner, good people have empowered evil throughout history.
Having confidence in a free society is to focus on the process of discovery in the marketplace of values rather than to focus on some imposed vision or goal. Using governmental force to impose a vision on others is intellectual sloth and typically results in unintended, perverse consequences. Achieving a free society requires courage to think, to talk, and to act – especially when it is easier to do nothing.”

UPDATE (June 6): THE CLAIMS OF KIDS. Great points as always, Myron (in Comments). We here at BAB have an interest, not a claim, in your sticking around. Your commitment to your daughter, of course, is voluntary, although I recall participating in long, theoretical, libertarian discussion threads as to whether our children have a legal claim on us. In other words: should you be jailed if you secede from taking care of them? A fascinating, but futile, debate.