Readers’ Remarks On ‘Into The Cannibal’s Pot’ & Pence Column

Etiquette, Ilana Mercer, Liberty, Morality, South-Africa

Manners are a species of morals. Other than to hate mail or rude mail, I try and respond to all letters I receive—to each and every one. Many thousands since 1998, which is when I got my first newspaper column. Due to time constraints, my replies are laconic. Sometimes I slip up. But if a reader has bothered to read my work and comment on what I have to say—then it’s only decent to acknowledge the gesture.

Most American opinion-merchants, however, don’t reply to their mail. That smacks of hubris and pride, almost always unwarranted. Since most are so uninspiring and mediocre, one wonders what they’re playing at, and why they’re not more humble.

George Will once wrote that “manners are the practice of a virtue. The virtue is called civility, a word related—as a foundation is related to a house—to the word civilization.”

In this context, a Golda Meir zinger comes to mind: “Don’t be so humble, you’re not that great.” It’s a relic from a time when false humility was at least still practiced.

A riff on the Meir quip might go as follows: “Can’t be bothered to answer your mail? Don’t be so arrogant, you suck.”

Here are some gratifying notes, received in response to “Get Off Your Knees, Gov. Pence! (You’re Not In A Gay Bathhouse),” a hot favorite.

Naturally, I replied to these and to others.

From: W.J.
Sent: Friday, April 03, 2015 9:17 AM
To: imercer@wnd.com
Subject: “Into the Cannibal’s Pot.”

Ilana,
Just read your advice to Gov. Pence and was reminded that I wanted to complement you for what is without a doubt one of the most important and brilliantly written books I’ve ever read (“Into the Cannibal’s Pot”). Sadly, what passes for “conservatism” in America today can’t seem to grasp that individual discrimination is the essence of freedom. Sanctimonious conservative talking heads, who seem to believe that Indiana is all (only) about freedom of religion and are incapable of registering a connection to “civil rights” legislation of 50 years ago, would do well to read you.
Thank you for being a beautifully intelligent voice in the wilderness of 21st century American political discourse. And thank you for finding your way to America – your arrival in your adopted homeland has come none too soon.
Respectfully,
Bill

From:
Sent: Friday, April 03, 2015 8:03 AM
To: imercer@wnd.com
Subject: Get Off Your Knees, Gov. Pence (You’re Not In A Gay Bathhouse)

Ilana —

A friend of mine forwarded me your excellent column. You did a terrific job of articulating one the basic aspects of liberty (enshrined in the First Amendment): the freedom of association. I live in Indianapolis (and know Mike Pence slightly). This issue has become so polarizing here, and, as you noted, the law itself is innocuous. …

… At any rate, please keep writing. You have a great gift for expressing important ideas through everyday examples.

Best to you,

DL

Get Off Your Knees, Gov. Pence! (You’re Not In A Gay Bathhouse)

Individual Rights, libertarianism, Private Property, Religion, Republicans

“Get Off Your Knees, Gov. Pence! (You’re Not In A Gay Bathhouse)” is the current column. An excerpt:

Pretend the U.S. is as free as the Founding Fathers intended it to be. In this authentically (and classically) liberal America, no one can tell free men and women what to do with their property, namely their bodies, their abodes and their businesses.

The individual living in America as it was meant to be is free to run his business as he wishes, associate with those he likes, dissociate from those he dislikes or disapproves; hire, fire, rent to or evict from, invest and disinvest, speak and misspeak at will.

This hypothetical free man is at liberty to bruise as many feelings as he likes, so long as his mitts stop at the next man’s face. So long as he harms nobody’s person or property, our mythic man may live as he wishes to live.

Americans have been propagandized for so long; they no longer grasp the basic building blocks of liberty. A crude reductio ad absurdum should help:

A retail store selling Nazi memorabilia opens its doors in my neighborhood. I enter in search of the yellow Star of David Jews were forced to wear during the Third Reich. The proprietor, decked out in Nazi insignia and regalia, says, “I’m sorry, we don’t serve Jews.” “Don’t be like that,” I say. “Where else can I find a pair of clip-on swastika earrings?” The Nazi sympathizer is polite but persistent: “Ma’am, I mean no disrespect, but back in the Old Country, Jews murdered my great grandfather’s cousin and used his blood in the leavening of the Passover matzah.” “Yeah,” I reply. “I’m familiar with that blood libel. I assure you my own mother’s matzo balls were free of the blood of brats, gentile or Jewish. No matter. I can see where you’re coming from. I’m sorry for your loss. Good luck.”

There! Did that hurt?

Did I rush off to rat out my Nazi neighbor to the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice? Not on your life. A principled Jewish libertarian (with a sense of humor)—who believes in absolute freedom of association and the rights of private property—would doff his Kippah and walk out. …

… Read the rest. “Get Off Your Knees, Gov. Pence! (You’re Not In A Gay Bathhouse)” is now on WND.

Featured on The Unz Report:

“Is Anarcho-Capitalism Compatible with Natural Justice?” By Ilana Mercer

‘Beer Talk’ From Blowhards: Pat Buchanan On Iran Hysteria

Britain, Foreign Policy, History, Iran, Israel, Middle East

“Are we going to be frightened by words from an Iranian blowhard?” Pat Buchanan tries to school Sean Hannity on the insignificance of Iran’s military as compared to American and Israeli might (and Bibi’s 200 plus atom bombs). It has not dawned on Mr. Hannity that the Arab alliance forming in the Middle East against ISIS, our mortal enemy, is exactly what the US needs if she is to get the hell out of the business of meddling where we are hated.

I like Pat’s description of Britain ending up on US food stamps because of WWII.

What is so disconcerting is the blowhards of cable. In Pat Buchanan you have a learned man who partook in successive American administration, at crucial times in our history; who has so much too impart. And rather than let him teach you something, you scream him down.

Anti-intellectual.

UPDATE II: Judge Andrew Napolitano: Some Libertarian (A Good Lawyer Counters)

Individual Rights, libertarianism, Paleolibertarianism, Private Property, Religion

The much-lauded Judge Andrew Napolitano, a feature speaker on some heavy hitting libertarian forums; quoted ad nauseam by these outlets too—does not appear to believe in the most basic of liberties: absolute freedom of association and the rights of private property. The Judge—supposedly a libertarian who should support the spirit of a law in furtherance of freedom of association and property rights—objects to giving individuals who want to exercise these individual rights, however, obnoxious, a legal standing to argue their case in a court of law.

WATCH.

UPDATED I: FACEBOOK THREAD & The Cult of Personality.

I suggest people listen again to the Judge. Moreover, it’s so stupid the way these TV personae acquire their fans who will defend them no matter. I’ve been following the Judge long enough to know he is a Reason-type, left-libertarian, who supports Civil Wrongs legislation. Look at the hot mess he made here.

UPDATE II: Jim Ostrowski is excellent, as always. Listen to a good lawyer as opposed a blowhard TV persona:

As I understand Indiana law, the only plausible libertarian position is to support the (very wimpy) religious defense statute. All laws banning private discrimination are to be opposed. This statute carves out a small slice of liberty in an otherwise loathsome legal regime. Liberty always trumps equality, including equal protection of the laws. It does sound like the Judge opposes this statute which position is NOT libertarian.

Also, as I argued on my page, the liberty required to carry out one’s religious obligations is far more that the right not to be shot on the way to church. The pioneers of liberty, many of whom were deeply religious, understood this and supported liberty in the fullest sense of the word (the right to do what you wish with what you own) precisely in order to meet one’s one religious obligations.

Further thoughts on Indiana–

Sandy Beach, WBEN.com, is a social moderate but fiscal conservative who opposes a religious exemption to civil rights laws. He appears not to realize that the very same principle that allows progressives to force business firms to serve this or that designated group, that is, the state’s right to force its alleged values on individuals, ALSO justifies all the taxes and regulatiions that Sandy presumably objects to, e.g., Obamacare. Liberty is seamless and so is progressivism!

Sandy made the point that being forced to do business with this or that group doesn’t threaten their religion. He misses the point. To be able to carry out one’s religious views, one needs liberty in all things, e.g., to be charitable, one needs the fruits of one’s labor. To raise your children properly, one needs the fruits of one’s labor as well. To visit the sick or prisoners, one needs time, energy and even money. All state coercion interferes with one’s religious moral duties.

Now that the progs have made quick work of several uber-conservative politicians, they smell blood in the water and will now go after religious groups more aggressively. You may laugh but I know the progressive mind fairly well. They start out attacking a thing but soon end up banning it.