Comments on: Libertarian-Free Zone

By: clark

clark — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 06:26:24 +0000

Reading this description about how things are today in the Russian population I was struck by how similar the Russian population is to our own especially in light of this post.

“What struck me, especially with the younger generation … is that they appear to be such conformists. No idealism, no values. They were just ready to cooperate with whomever they saw as their superiors. That’s why ultimately, nowadays, we unexpectedly found ourselves in the position of outsiders, dissidents, even enemies. That’s the way it developed… Conformism is absolutely overwhelming here… You should not distinguish between the Russian authorities and the Russian people. From the unemployed in the provinces, to the top of the hierarchy, conformism is huge. Also within the media, they are all willing to cooperate. It is a reality and it will develop that way, despite today’s economic troubles. It is a typically Russian phenomenon.””

*Is it really?

“The Cold War never ended… In the Soviet Union your personnel file followed you whenever you changed from one job to another…The West was just happy that we let go of the names of Communism and Soviet and so on. We changed our vocabulary.”

*We in America claimed to have held onto everything when in fact we changed everything, and kept our vocabulary. War is peace, freedom is slavery, etc…

“Moscow has consistently followed the same line of policy. What is misleading for many people is that the material military presence is not there anymore. We don’t need so many tanks. The question is what sort of design, what sort of strategy you have in place… The important thing is manipulation and influence instead of direct control.”

http://financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/pastanalysis/2009/0724.html

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 16:43:24 +0000

“They are the reason why freedom may be on its last legs.”

Those dim bulbs are merely a symptom of a much larger problem: underlying collectivist principles in action.

By: Robin

Robin — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 02:51:45 +0000

I need to make a partial retraction. In my previous post, I asserted: “The defendant will not be permitted to confront the witnesses against him, let alone have them cross examined by defense counsel. To admit such protections of innocence would encumber the trial with too many complexities (again, well beyond the intellectual grasp of children)…” These protections may be comprehensible to the average 8-year-old. Nevertheless, a child is unlikely to think them necessary, or protest their exclusion, until he himself is accused.

By: Phil

Phil — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 02:42:24 +0000

This is not the first time Simon Properties has tried to create a libertarian-free zone. At the last minute the management of Gwinnett Place Mall in the Atlanta area canceled the July 4 tea party that had been scheduled there. Here’s the story (if your comments manager understands HTML you can click here. Otherwise, just copy and paste the URL into your browser’s address window.)
Of course, Simon Properties is free not to renew the lease of a tenant, and they are even free to ban a rally on an adjacent piece of property if their easement agreement with the adjacent property owner permits them to do so. But we are free to refrain from spending our money at Simon malls and shopping centers. You can find a list of them several places on the web, and probably on the company’s website.
Boycott, anyone?

By: Robin

Robin — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 02:27:05 +0000

JL Bryan writes: “Did they leave out the part where the judge or jury decides whether the accused is guilty?” I think they included it. But consider: The deliberation of a *juvenile* judge or jury is already a mockery of justice, even on moot court terms, because children do not understand what a “guilty” verdict means in the real world. Moreover, what passes for jurisprudence in this exercise could be grounded only in the grossest legal positivism (e.g., polluting is a crime because the State declares it so). We must presume the exclusion of any Natural Law or Common Law principles, these being anathema in our Prussian-model state schools. The defendant will not be permitted to confront the witnesses against him, let alone have them cross examined by defense counsel. To admit such protections of innocence would encumber the trial with too many complexities (again, well beyond the intellectual grasp of children), but more important, these would distract attention from the enviro-communist indoctrination for which the sham trial is but a pretext. The crowning travesty will be the spirit of the proceedings, the youngsters’ malicious delight in being permitted and encouraged to gang up on a lone child. Yet if the defendant be the class bully, who they are afraid to convict, or the popular child, of whom they are too fond to convict, will the actions of timidity or favoritism impart a less corrupting idea of law? The more you think about this role playing exercise from a libertarian perspective, the viler it becomes.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 00:02:45 +0000

Oh, but didn’t you know? They are all so smart and have all the answers, just ask them…

j/k. They’ll “tell” you whether you ask them to or not.

By: JL Bryan

JL Bryan — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:30:13 +0000

“Have the accused explain why he thinks he’s innocent, then have the accusers explain why they think he is guilty. Then have the court decide his punishment!”

Did they leave out the part where the judge or jury decides whether the accused is guilty? Creepy.

By: Robin

Robin — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:59:04 +0000

Steve Haag writes: “My nephew – almost 8 yrs. old – is a bright kid so it is my hope that he’ll be able to overcome the boilerplate propaganda he’ll be spoon fed throughout his school years.” My own nephew was the same age when I leafed through one of his state school textbooks and found this wonderful classroom group activity: Conduct a trial in which a student is charged with an environmental crime. Have the accused explain why he thinks he’s innocent, then have the accusers explain why they think he is guilty. Then have the court decide his punishment! The schools didn’t succeed in turning my nephew into a collectivist moron, mainly because his father taught him to think for himself.

By: Johnathan

Johnathan — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:10:26 +0000

Karen–yeah, we’re in agreement.

With respect to the dumbed-down masses, or people like Miss Ibanez–they have to live the rest of their lives inside their own heads, which is worse punishment than anything I could wish upon them. At least I have arranged my and my family’s affairs such that I rarely have to deal with that head on.

By: clark

clark — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:55:16 +0000

Staying out of Simon Property Group malls is exactly what came to mind, and I shall. Now I know why the, “interesting and different” stores were always so bland and run of the mill with nothing more flamboyant than, “Go! Team” or, “Beer U” and other meaningless gothic graphic type images that said nothing on the t-shirts. That letter blew me away, astonishing such close mindedness continues, come on already it’s 2009, enough with the storm trooper attitudes, and enough with the, “It’s the year such and such” as if that slogan hasn’t been used for everything that has no ground to stand on for far too long now. The John Taylor Gatto quote just stunned me in how accurate it is, wow. I’ve read that the generation who graduated before 1963 wasn’t like that at all, and the creep of changing the society was gradual from that point on. I’m half 1963 type and half what Gotto described, no wonder I feel so out of place, especially when I point out or resist the B.S. of how things are the way they are. “That’s just the way things are now.” Ugh! Get me outta this place.