Liberty & Power: Group Blog
Entries by Aeon J. Skoble
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Canadian leader comes to USA for operation
HT Todd Zywicki
"Sarah"
This short video is a hilarious "mockumentary" done by GMU Economics undergrad Mark Maranta. It recently won a video contest sponsored by the Fraser Institute. HT Don Boudreaux.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Media
Three items of note:
Doug Rasmussen at CATO - soon to feature replies from Roderick Long, Mike Huemer, and Neera Badhwar.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Mises on iTunes
This is interesting - Stephan Kinsella informs me that a lot of Mises Inst. stuff is now on iTunes.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Disney anti-Nazi film
A FB friend tipped me off to this anti-Nazi short from Disney. This is great stuff. 10 minutes, have a look.
Friday, January 1, 2010
2010
Happy new year to all L&P readers and bloggers!
Friday, November 20, 2009
Dan Klein on the Invisible Hand
GMU economist Daniel Klein and GMU grad student Brandon Lucas have an interesting piece here on the centrality to Adam Smith of the "invisible hand" notion. Here's the abstract:
"We explore the conjecture, first hinted at by Peter Minowitz, that Smith deliberately placed his central idea, as represented by the phrase “led by an invisible hand,” at the physical center of his masterworks. The four most significant points developed are as follows: (1) The expression “led by an invisible hand” occurs pretty much dead center of the 1st and 2nd editions of Wealth of Nations, and of the final edition of the volumes containing Theory of Moral Sentiments. (2) The expression in WN drifted only a bit from the center, only about 5 percent from the center in the final edition (and even less if the index is excluded). (3) The rhetoric lectures show that Smith not only was conscious of deliberate placement of potent words at the center, but thought it significant enough to remark on to his pupils, noting that Thucydides “often expresses all that he labours so much in a word or two, sometimes placed in the middle of the narration.” (4) There are numerous and rich ways in which centrality and middle-ness hold special and positive significance in Smith’s thought."
Monday, October 26, 2009
Health Insurance Reform piece
It's always a pleasure and an honor when FEE selects one of my columns as a "timely classic" -- and an excuse for me to repost it here. You can decide for yourself whether it's a classic, but it's certainly timely.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Don Boudreaux wins Szasz Award!
Congratulations to Don on this well-deserved award!
(HT Todd Zywicki)
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Is President Obama constitutionally barred from accepting the Nobel Prize?
Arguably: this is interesting. Discuss in comments!
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Long Overdue
The 1942 Italian film of Ayn Rand's debut novel We The Living is a gem. The novel is itself well worthwhile, even if (or especially if) you think already know all you need to know about Rand and her fiction. It's definitely underrated, very good, and interestingly different from her later fiction. Also, it's a valuable primary source on life in Bolshevik Russia. Anyway, in case you hadn't heard the story of the movie, it's pretty neat: in the early 40s, some liberty-minded Italian filmmakers decided to make the movie. Being at war with the US, they couldn't get permission from Rand, so they just did it. The fascist censors, seeing it was critical of their Russian enemies, let things go ahead, not realizing it was anti-fascist also. When they figured it out, most copies of the film were destroyed, but not all, and decades later Rand tracked it down and oversaw the initial stages of preparing it for rerelease. I first saw it in the late 80s, after seeing an article about it in the January 89 Reason, having never read any Rand. I found it extremely moving and intellectually stimulating. A few years later, I thought I should buy a copy on VHS, but DVDs were starting to become commonplace, so I held off, figuring I'd wait til it was released on DVD. And I've been waiting for 15 years. But now it's available! About time too. (HT Roderick Long, on his other blog.)
Friday, October 9, 2009
Peace Prize? Seriously?
Ok, I volunteer to play the role of cynical, raining-on-the-parade guy this morning: how on Earth is President Obama the Nobel laureate for Peace? He's been president less than a year. Never mind that he has not ended any of the military activities that President Bush was reviled for, there's simply no way to know what will happen in the next three years. Some of the NYT analysis suggested that it was an aspirational choice - he's filled the world with hope for peace, has announced intentions to bring peace, etc. - but that can't be right. Surely the award is for accomplishments, not aspirations and intentions. And sure enough the Chairman of the Nobel committee says “We are not awarding the prize for what may happen in the future, but for what he has done in the previous year.” But what exactly is that? The ecstatic NPR correspondent I was listening to while driving in to work suggested, following a suggestion by Elie Wiesel, that just being elected president was the thing, because it "enables America to put it's racial past behind it." But then shouldn't the prize go to the voters? Obama couldn't have been elected President if people hadn't voted for him. I know TR and Wilson and Carter also have one of these (as does Yasser Arafat), but nine months in? Premature. One can only hope he lives up to the honor.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
What kind of a country would arrest a journalist for covering a protest?
Sad but true. Have a look.
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Brooks on dignity etc
David Brooks' column from the NYT the other day is mostly right on, except for one weird thing. While diagnosing the demise of what he calls the dignity code (go read the column if you haven't yet - I'll wait), he identifies several factors which are surely part of the problem, and one which probably isn't: capitalism! How does this contribute to the demise of dignity? "We are all encouraged to become managers of our own brand, to do self-promoting end zone dances to broadcast our own talents." Didn't realize that end-zone dancing was the essence of capitalism; must have missed where Mises discusses that. Snark aside, Brooks is here confusing the free market/classical liberal social order with consumerism/hucksterism. But there is nothing about free markets that requires that people be crass and undignified, and a lot of what he likely has in mind is of relatively recent vintage. What bothers me even more than this error is the sneaking suspicion that Brooks knows this, and has conflated the two in an attempt to appease his lefty readers: in other words, yet more gratuitous bashing of capitalism.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Religion and Misogyny
Good review essay by Johann Hari of what looks to be an important book on how, even today, many cultures perpetuate hardcore misogyny by claiming religious inspiration, which makes them essentially immune to criticism.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Rays of ravishing light and glory
Happy Independence Day everyone!
Saturday, June 27, 2009
The Silence of the Regulated
Short film from CEI -- very amusing. (HT Jonathan Adler)
Thursday, June 4, 2009
20 years ago?
Good essay on Tiananmen Square.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Homeland Security tracking gaming habits?
L&P Reader Daniel Schmutter shares this scary anecdote about big brother.
"I had an appalling expreince yesterday trying to trade in my daughter's used Nintendo DS games at Gamestop. Trying to trade in Petz Hamsters and Shrek 2 turned into a lesson in just how pervasive the surveillance state has become.
I walked into Gamestop to trade in the two used DS games, and the clerk asked me if I wanted cash or a store credit. When I replied "cash" the clerk asked for my driver's license. When I asked why, he told me that they are technically a pawn shop, and when giving cash for a trade-in they must report the recipient's driver's license number to the Department of Homeland Security and the Internal Revenue Service.
So, I changed my selection to "store credit," whereupon the clerk promptly asked me for my name and telephone number. When I asked why . . . you guessed it . . . he replied that, as a pawn shop, he had to report that information to the Department of Homeland Security and the Internal Revenue Service. He said that they needed to track these things.
Outraged, I replied that they do NOT need to track these things and that they already track way too many things. I told him that it was nobody's business but his and mine that I was selling used video games.
I reminded him that I cannot even buy cold medicine at the drug store without reporting the transaction to the government. (I no longer buy Sudafed. To paraphrase Ben Franklin, he who is willing to give up essential liberty to purchase a little decongestant deserves neither liberty nor decongestant.)
I stormed out of the store Petz Hamsters and Shrek 2 in hand. I doubt the kid even understood the point."
Kudos to Dan for standing up agaisnt surveillance, and thanks again for sharing the story. I have to note that, Ben Franklin's scorn notwithstanding, I do surrender my liberty for properly functioning cold meds. Help, help, I'm being repressed!
Sunday, May 3, 2009
RIP Jack Kemp
Times obit here. he was more libertarian-oriented than 99% of other mainstream politicians. For a brief moment, I thought Kemp had promise for bringing an increase in liberty to national politics. Anyway, I kinda miss him. I also miss him in my capacity as a Bills fan - he was terrific, an All-Star and AFL-champion quarterback in the pre-merger days. (Before my time, but one reads the lore.)
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Shots heard round the world
[Reposted from a year ago, but whatever.]
When I first moved to Massachusetts, I was pleased to see that they have official observance of a holiday that, afaik, no other state, nor the feds, seem to recognize: Patriot's Day, which commemorates (even if doesn't always fall on) April 19th. April 19th of 1775, in case you didn't recall, was the battles of Concord and Lexington, the date many use as the actual start of the War for Independence, aka the Revolutionary War. I've toured the Concord battle site a couple times, and it never fails to elicit a little misting up around the eyes. I can't help but be impressed with the guts it must have taken for the colonists to have not only decided they'd had enough of British oppression, but that they were going to do something about it - and then to face fire from actual British troops. Impressive, amazing. Just as we commemorate July 4th, I think it's important to commemorate April 19th. A lot of things about Mass. may irk me, but I'm glad they celebrate this here.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Good stuff
L&P readers will be interested to see that GMU economist Daniel Klein has made two of his "libertarian theoretics" available online as powerpoints. One is Challenging, Bargaining, and Royalty: An Analysis of Libertarian Argumentation. The other is Mere Libertarianism: Blending Hayek and Rothbard. (The latter is based on a 2004 article Klein published in Reason Papers.) Check them both out!
Friday, April 3, 2009
No such thing as bad publicity, part 2
Wow, two pleasant surprises in one week. First my book gets reviewed in The Independent Review, and now I see David Gordon, senior fellow at the Mises Institute, has also reviewed it for The Mises Review. Gordon thinks I have gotten Nozick wrong, and we've corresponded on this. The ball is in my court to reply to his concerns, and I've promised to do that soon -- not immediately, as I'll be at the APEE conference most of next week -- but for the most part he is very kind and has a lot of good things to say about it. I'm deeply gratified, for it getting any attention at all, let alone for praise.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Let's Do the Time Warp
I just received in the mail the latest (Spring 09) issue of The Independent Review, a first-rate journal which is edited by distinguished economist (and L&P co-blogger) Bob Higgs. I was thrilled to notice, when glancing at the table of contents, that my 2008 book Deleting the State: An Argument about Government was among the books reviewed. The review was written by philosopher Jan Narveson, author of (among other things) The Libertarian Idea, who is certainly in a good position to know whether I know what I’m talking about, so I was pleased to see that the review was largely favorable. I do feel I need to reply to one thing though. One of Narveson’s main criticisms of the book is that I do not address an important article, Randy Holcombe’s 2004 “Government: Unnecessary but Inevitable,” also, as it happens, from The Independent Review. Narveson couldn't have known this, of course, but the main reason I did not address this 2004 article is that I wrote the book some years earlier. Epic production delays and poor business conditions at my publisher meant that they had the manuscript in hand for ages before finally printing the thing. If I had written the book in, say, 2006, I would surely have addressed Holcombe, and I hope to do so in the near future. But the truth is, the book was finished by 2002, so it’s not really my fault that I don’t address material written in 2004. Anyway, it was otherwise a very fair review, and I was happy to get it.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Timely at least
I'm always pleased and honored when FEE chooses one of my pieces as a "Timely Classic." Today they've posted a piece I wrote for them last June on health care in a free society.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Read Read
Via L&P reader Stephan Kinsella, I am delighted to learn that the complete works of Leonard Read are going to available on line at LVMI. Leonard Read was the founder of what might be the oldest freedom-oriented institute/think-tank, FEE, and the author of the legendary "I, Pencil." He wrote lots of other things, and now we can all have easy access. Great news.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Peter Singer's Hypocrisy Continues Unabated
Peter Singer explains in the CHE why philosophy is self-indulgent, while continuing to be a philosopher. Self-explanatorily obnoxious.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
In which I explain why I liked the film version of Watchmen
Some L&P readers may be interested in my take on the film version of my favorite graphic novel, Watchmen. It's below the fold.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Econ Bleg
Pardon the self-referential post, but I don't want this to get lost. In the comments thread to my post 2 entries down "Wait, what?" reader Dan Schmutter raises an interesting objection which I would like to see some economists in particular reply to. Potential for a really good discussion here. Keep it civil please!
Wait, what?
Clear-headed readers help me out please: Did I misunderstand the news story I heard on the radio driving to work? It sounded like the Democratic president proposed a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions, and the Republican congressional leadership said it was a bad idea. I'm confused.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
A Pleasant Surprise
I was pleasantly surprised to receive an campus-wide email the other day announcing that Eugene Volokh was being brought here to give a talk to the BSC Pre-Law Association. The talk was this afternoon. Volokh's is one of the sharpest minds I know, and it was a great opportunity for my students to be able to listen to him and ask questions. Well, those of my students who came, anyway. He was giving his "Mechanisms of the Slippery Slope" talk, which is well worth your time, in case you haven't read it - it's on his UCLA webste in several versions; here is one of them.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Reason Papers #30
An update to my post yesterday about Reason Papers: The latest issue is due back from the printer imminently, but in accordance with the new policy, you can read or download all of RP#30 right now, at the RP website. Click on "archives" and select #30 - or any other issue going back to #1 in 1974.
Contents include articles by William Glod on paternalism, Clifton Perry on litigation, Kathleen Touchstone on charity, and William Barnett & Walter Block on Hummel's take on Austrian Business Cycle Theory. There's also a long review essay by Managing Editor Carrie-Ann Biondi on Tara Smith's recent book on Rand. The issue concludes with 4 book reviews: Mary Lefkowitz reviews Emily Wilson on the death of Socrates, Jan Narveson reviews William Hudson's book criticizing libertarianism, H.G. Callaway reviews Arthur Schlesinger, and David Gordon reviews Jerry Kirkpatrick's book on education theory.
Special thanks to L&P reader Stephan Kinsella for lots of awesome help with the PDFs, and to Jeff Tucker at LVMI for offering to host the site.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
News from Reason Papers
When Reason Papers, the journal I have been fortunate enough to edit since 2003, first opened its website, we used a "2-issue moving wall," meaning that the free PDF archive of all back issues (going back to the beginning in 1974) stopped 2 issues short of whatever the current issue was. But as of this issue, we have decided to drop the moving wall concept. As of now, all issues are available on the website (#30, at the printer now, isn't there yet, but will be up shortly). This way, our contributors' work will get a much wider exposure without having to wait two years. So, please go have a look. All of vol. 1-29 are available now, and #30 will be up in a day or so.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Interesting symposium
Over at Jacob Levy's blog, he is hosting a fascinating symposium on Nancy Rosenblum's book, On the Side of Angels: An Appreciation of Parties and Partisanship. Contributors include Levy, Rosenblum, Henry Farrell, Patrick Deneen, Mara Marin, Melissa Schwartzberg, and Nadia Urbinati. I haven't had time to read the whole thing carefully yet, but just from glancing at it I can see I'll want to.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
A new journal to read, and to write for
I just received this announcement about a new libertarian-oriented journal, called Libertarian Papers, to be peer-reviewed but exclusively on-line. I have pasted their announcement under the fold. Looks great!
More scary toys
After seeing the "scary toys" item below, alert reader Dan Schmutter noted these also. Again, read the customer reviews for more sarcastic goodness.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Scary Toys
Here's a toy that's both funny and scary at the same time: A security checkpoint! Incredible. Bonus: Be sure to read the customer reviews, they're hilarious. Hat tip: Andrew Cohen. No, the other one.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
IP Bleg
I know many libertarian/classical liberals who oppose copyright and other IP regulation. I have read, though, that libertarian opposition to IP is not universal. Can someone give me the names of libetarian/classical liberal types who support IP and copyright? I'm most interested in philosophers and law profs, but would be interested to learn of any academics who fit this description. NB I'm not interested in starting a discussion thread on it at this time, I am just looking for information on the key players. Thanks!
UPDATE: those are great answers in the comments; thanks very much to the three of you.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Why I'm Okay With Obama
I know libertarian opinion varies as to whether (a) Democrats are marginally better then Republicans, (b) Republicans are marginally better than Democrats, (c) it's better to vote LP, (d) it's better to abstain entirely, and (e) voting is unimportant. But it being Nov 5th, all I want to talk about now is why yesterday was fine with me.
I voted for Ron Paul in the primary (in MA, you can vote in any primary regardless of affiliation; I am not a member of any party) in the possibly-naive hope that the GOP might actually start embracing the free-market policies they so often talk about. But Paul, for whom I voted back in 88, was roundly rejected by the GOP. I still thought I might vote LP or abstain, but what changed my mind was the recent financial crisis. No, it wasn't that the crisis made me long for Democratic regulations and abandon the idea of the market. It was the fact that the crisis was being blamed on "the failed laissez-faire principles of the Republican Party." All of a sudden, free-market ideas and libertarianism were being attributed to President Bush and the GOP. It became clear to me that it's actually worse to talk the rhetoric of free markets and not act that way than it is to openly say you're skeptical. Classical liberalism can't afford another four years of false advertising and blame for effects it's not causing. So I'm delighted that the Democrats are in power again. Let this be a lesson to the GOP: you must stop paying lip service to, but then betraying, libertarian ideals. You must actually produce candidates who want to protect and promote liberty and reduce the scope of government. Then freedom lovers will have every reason to want your party back in charge.
Another factor makes me feel good about yesterday. Although it's been said over and over by every commentator, there was something special about yesterday's outcome. Although he tried not to position himself as "the black candidate," I think it's pretty great that enough voters got behind a black (or to be more precise, mixed-race) candidate as to elect him. I think this aspect of his presidency will have a positive effect on society. Will he be a dogmatic hard-left president? I don't think so. I suspect he'll be open to at least entertaining the notion of market-based approaches, partly because he's young, and partly because he's got some advisors on his team who do think that way, and partly because they're true, and he's smart enough to get that. Maybe I'm wrong, and he'll be hardcore anti-market. But at least he won't call socialist policies "laissez-faire capitalism."
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Various Votes
I know the polls are still open in some states, but I'm afraid Ron Paul just won't be winning tonight.
In other news, Mass voters have apparently voted to decriminalize (smallish amounts of) marijuana, but also to ban dog track betting. I've been trying to figure out whether that's a net gain or net loss for liberty, but I'm also trying to get these papers graded.
UPDATE: I did get the papers graded. And I don't think it's an awful thing that the Democrat won last night. I'll get a meatier post on that up as soon as clear my desk of some time-sensitive tasks.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Talking ads
It's being looked in to. More later.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Another Blog to Read
Ed Feser now has a blog. You may remember Ed as the editor of The Cambridge Companion to Hayek, which is great, and he's written for Liberty magazine, although a note on his website indicates he's backed away from libertarianism to some extent. Regardless, his writing will be of interest to L&P readers, so go visit his site. He also has a new book coming out critical of atheism - again, an issue L&P readers may find interesting.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
On Experience
I was going to make this a comment on Steve's post 2 entries down, but it's worth putting on top. A reader brought this essay by Sam Harris to my attention, and this one passage struck me as perfect:
He writes: "Americans have an unhealthy desire to see average people promoted to positions of great authority. No one wants an average neurosurgeon or even an average carpenter, but when it comes time to vest a man or woman with more power and responsibility than any person has held in human history, Americans say they want a regular guy, someone just like themselves….This is one of the many points at which narcissism becomes indistinguishable from masochism."
Just so. I wish I had written that.
Dirty Hands and so forth
This essay by Irfan Khawaja in Baltic Security and Defense Review is essentially a reply by an HNN writer to some criticisms from an earlier exchange, but the issues are still vital and the underlying discussion still important. Allow at least 20 minutes reading time.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Wishful Thinking
Well, summer is over, and for those of us in academia, it's a new year. As I start reestablishing my work routines, I hope to resume blogging. Here's something that was brought to my attention by L&P reader John Pappas: In the WSJ, Al Hubbard and Noam Neusner opine that Obama's economic proposals (and therefore his candidacy) are likely to fail because "Americans are wiser than they are given credit. They know that if you restrict supply and tax production, prices go up." They conclude: "The economic wisdom of Americans should not be doubted. They can see through Mr. Obama's proposals. They know that they will have to pick up the bill if Mr. Obama sends checks to people who already don't pay taxes; they know a centralized government-controlled health-care system will be more expensive, less efficient, and less friendly to patients and doctors. They know that the most effective way to bring down energy prices is by keeping all our energy options open, including more drilling in the U.S. And they know that if a candidate has spent his entire career taxing more and spending more, that's what you'll get -- and more of it."
That's all true, except the first part. Sadly, most Americans can't see through the smoke and mirrors of most politicians' economic schemes, don't understand any of the relationships described above, and continue to vote for more of the same.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Who Watches the Watchmen?
I’ve written before about the moral and political relevance of vigilante/superhero fiction, and the best graphic novel dealing with that subject, Watchmen, by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons, has been filmed, for release next spring. The first trailer came out last night, and while I have been leery of this project for fear of them screwing it up, I have to say the trailer looks great. Pretty much every second of the trailer is right from the book, and I’ve read that the book pretty much is the storyboard. Seems like the “feel” of the film will be pretty faithful. The director seems to have appropriate respect for the source material and a good sense of detail. They’re doing it as a period piece, and I’ve read that they are not messing with the ending. He did a great job with 300, which is further cause for (guarded) optimism. Of course there are still dozens of ways they could make it suck, but the trailer is a very promising look at what might actually be ok.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
good news for a change
I have never blogged from the airport before; hope this works. The news is good: the Supremes have affirmed in _Heller_, meaning they have (rightly) affirmed the 2nd amendment as protecting an _individual_ rkba. More later; for now go to VC or scotusblog.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Goodnight, funnyman
Sad news in the NYT: George Carlin has died.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Timely potential classic
I'm always pleased and honored when FEE selects one of my past columns as the "Timely Classic" in their daily email digest. I'll let you judge whether it's classic, but it's (sadly) definitely timely. This one is from their monthly "It Just Ain't So" column, in which contributors are asked to rebut some popular misconception.
Monday, June 16, 2008
What exactly does "promote" mean here?
The AMA is criticizing Marvel and Universal because, according to them, the new film of The Hulk promotes smoking. How exactly does it promote smoking? The bad guy smokes cigars. Maybe I missed the day this was covered in "we have no free will and are brainwashed by media" school, but how exactly does it promote activity X to have X practiced by the villain? On that reasoning, all movies involving crime should be banned, since they could be said to promote crime. Please.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
A Farewell to Kings
Fantastic news from across the globe about the abolition of yet another monarchy. (Hat tip: Fark)
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Collectivist Candidates
David Boaz has a great essay in the WSJ on the candidates' collectivism today, here. (Hat tip: Don Boudreaux)
Friday, May 16, 2008
Shameless self-promotion, video edition
Oh snap! The college had me do a video about Deleting the State. I thought they would be interviewing me, but found out at the last minute that it was to be a monologue. Anyway, it didn't turn out too badly. It's here.
You know, it occurs to me that several of my publications over the last few years have described me as being the author of a forthcoming book called "Freedom, Authority, and Social Order." As I note in the video, that was the working title of Deleting the State, so the five of you who have been patiently awaiting the release of the former can stop. This is that book, but with a different title.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Job Satisfaction?
Over at the Atlantic, Megan McArdle writes about why academics seem to be unhappy all the time (further thoughts by VC’s Ilya Somin here). It’s true that we grumble to our colleagues about annoyances particular to our jobs, but I suspect everyone does that. But the deeper philosophical point is that it’s possible to be happy with one’s job and at the same time be unhappy about aspects of one’s job. For example, you might think we’re unhappy about the relatively low pay of academics. But I don’t think most academics are unhappy about being paid poorly relative to hedge-fun managers or thoracic surgeons. We consciously chose a profession generally known to produce a comfortable middle-to-upper-middle-class income, not one generally known for prodigious wealth generation. But we do get unhappy when we find we’re paid poorly relative to other academics. You see this phenomenon among faculty at non-elite institutions w.r.t. elite institutions, and among humanities/soc.sci. faculty w.r.t. those who have non-academic options (chemists, engineers, etc.). But feeling badly about that doesn’t mean one is unhappy with the job. Also, as some of Megan’s commenters noted, even if one loves to teach, one might be unhappy that the only or best available job has a 4/4 or 5/5 teaching load. Thirdly, you might love being an academic, but find that at this particular job, you are generally treated with contempt or indifference by administrators (I hasten to add that this is not a complaint I have about my present institution). Fourth, one might be annoyed by the general lack of respect for academics in the general culture, which, as far as I can tell, dates from the late 60s. Look at how academics are portrayed in popular culture prior to, say, 1967, and compare it to how we are portrayed thereafter. (For more on this, see here and here.) But make no mistake, most of us are, in general, happy about what we do for a living. I know I am. Ilya goes on to mention that there are really three things he’d give up academia for. I’d add beer-taster or wine-taster or the like to that list, but the basic idea is the same. Most academics like what they do, even if they grumble about institutional obstacles to peak performance, or sometimes feel underappreciated by society. I don’t know about you, but I love my work. See also: Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics 1178: the contemplative life is the happy life.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Shots heard 'round the world; or, why I get a 3-day weekend
When I first moved to Massachusetts, I was pleased to see that they have official observance of a holiday that, afaik, no other state, nor the feds, seem to recognize: Patriot's Day, which commemorates (even if doesn't always fall on) April 19th. April 19th of 1775, in case you didn't recall, was the battles of Concord and Lexington, the date many use as the actual start of the War for Independence, aka the Revolutionary War. I've toured the Concord battle site a couple times, and it never fails to elicit a little misting up around the eyes. I can't help but be impressed with the guts it must have taken for the colonists to have not only decided they'd had enough of British oppression, but that they were going to do something about it - and then to face fire from actual British troops. Impressive, amazing. Just as we commemorate July 4th, I think it's important to commemorate April 19th. A lot of things about Mass. may irk me, but I'm glad they celebrate this here.
In other "things to commemorate" news, it's Passover. You don't have to be Jewish, or even religous, to find it worth celebrating the liberation of the Jews from slavery, and by extension, the very idea of liberation from slavery and oppression. How nice that, this year at least, these two holidays coincide.
Monday, April 7, 2008
Shameless self-promotion
Hot off the presses: my book, Deleting the State: An Argument about Government has finally been released. Publisher’s link. Amazon link. After many production delays, it’s very gratifying to see this finally come to print. But enough about my feelings – go buy it already!
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Stop Whining
I can't take much more of this. Hillary is now claiming that it's a matter of civil rights that the Democratic Party non-primaries in FL and MI should count. First of all, I hope it's obvious to everyone that the only reason she says this is that she needs the extra delegates she might get there. But the larger issue is that it's false. No one denied voters there the right to vote in an election. Primaries are party events. While in some states, any registered voter can vote in any primary, in other states, only registered party members can vote in that party's primary. Furthermore, the Democratic Party said something along the lines of "do not move up your state's primary in the calendar in a blatant attempt at getting more pork; if you do that, your delegates will not be regognized." Surely even state legislators are clever enough to understand basic if-then reasoning. They were told not to do it, they were told what the penalty would be if they did it, they did it anyway. Now they complain that it's not fair? Give me a break!
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Childhood's End
A sad day indeed for science fiction: Arthur C. Clarke has died. RIP.
UPDATE: Longer obit here.
I Can Has RKBA Now?
The Supremes heard oral argument today in the Heller case. I listened for a while on the C-Span radio feed (which, I might add, is WAY COOL), and it seemed to me as though the statist case was weak. I already thought it was weak conceptually, of course, I mean it seemed today like the Supremes weren't buying it, which would be nice. That's just my impression; go to VC for lots of recap and analysis by people more knowledgeable.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Sisyphean Labors
I'm honored that one of my older pieces was selected as today's "Timely Classic" from FEE, which is archived here. (NB this is from 1994; I don't teach at Auburn anymore.) Rereading it, though, the first line made me a little sad: my statement that the dispute between communitarianism and individualism was one of the main issues of the day. But 14 years later, communitarianism hasn't gone away (indeed, it's running for president!). So, it's back to work for me I guess!
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
William F. Buckley
Apparently, he is now dead. I have no obits to link to, but the notification is appearing at the top of most news sites.
UPDATE: Well, there's this.
Update 2: just to clarify (and preempt some flaming) - I'm not much of a NR guy, and Buckley's brand of conservatism wasn't as pro-liberty as I'd like -- indeed, sometimes downright anti-liberty -- but his providing an intellectual and popular voice for conservatism made the left less complacent and, even if it wasn't his intention, helped open the door for libertarian voices to jump in to the fray. (Was that too many mixed metaphors? Sorry.)
Monday, February 11, 2008
I Have A Gub
The DC v. Heller case before the Supreme Court is hugely important for con law, for RKBA, and for individual liberty generally. Many amici briefs are being filed, and L&P readers may find them interesting reading. You can get to all of them here, and there’s good discussion of them on VC. (Of special note is that regular L&P commenter (and my friend) Dan Schmutter is the counsel of record for JPFO, and is the author of their amicus brief. He makes a terrific argument. Nice work, Dan!)
Thursday, February 7, 2008
It's McCain
This just in: Romney is out. (Hat tip: VC.)
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Super Tuesday aftermath
Ok, I guess I didn't vote hard enough, Ron Paul didn't win Massachusetts. McCain's lead is now very solid, but it's not a done deal yet. To hear the MSM describe it, Huckabee had already vanished, but he had many strong results, splitting the anti-McCain vote, winning several contests. Paul did manage a third-place finish in three states, but I think it's over, sad to say. Romney didn't do as well as I was hoping, where "hoping" refers only to my sense that he's less scary a prospect than McCain and vastly preferable to Huck.
On the Dem side, Hillary did better than I would have liked. DO NOT WANT. Even though Mass. Gov. Patrick and both Senators endorsed Obama, Hillary's strength with liberal boomer women worked well here, and, evidently, many other places. Fortunately, her lead is slim, where "fortunately" refers only to my sense that Obama is less scary, and marginally more liberty-friendly, than Hillary.
UPDATE: Hmm, I guess it's actually not clear who is ahead in delegates. See here, e.g.
One other thing. If I keep hearing these sloppy, lazy, MSM journalists describe Hillary's victory in New York as "winning her home state," I'm going to have start taking hostages. Even the NYT does this! One correspondent on NPR got it right this morning, referring to her winning her adopted home state. The reality is, she lost her home state, Illinois, to Obama.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
About time, too
ACLU remembers to defend free speech at Brandeis. (Hat tip: VC)
Super Tuesday Begins
I can't imagine being a member of either of the two major parties, or any party for that matter, but here in Mass, independents get to vote in primaries, so I went in to the polling place and did my part for Ron Paul. Starting to seem, though, that his campaign is over. Too bad, since we're not going to get much love for individual liberty from any of the remaining candidates.
UPDATE: Didn't work.
In other news, the actor Barry Morse has died. You may remember his work in The Outer Limits, The Fugitive, and Space:1999.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Thompson is out
This just in: Sen. Fred Thompson has withdrawn from the GOP race. (Hat tip: VC.)
In other news (same page), actor Heath Ledger has died, age 28, cause unknown.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Pleasant surprise
After nearly throwing up in the car this morning listening to all the protectionist pandering coming out of Michigan, it comes as a pleasant surprise to see a strong free-trade op-ed in, of all places, the NYT.
Hat tip: Hit and Run
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Ron Paul's reply to TNR
ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – In response to an article published by The New Republic, Ron Paul issued the following statement:
“The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.
“In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person's character, not the color of their skin. As I stated on the floor of the U.S. House on April 20, 1999: ‘I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies.’
“This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.
“When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.”
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Iowa news
It's Obama and Huckabee in Iowa. Paul finished ahead of Giuliani, but (sad to say) well behind Huck, Mitt, Thompson, and McCain. Hat tip: VC
Monday, December 31, 2007
Another county heard from
Like Roderick, I also am back from the APA. In addition to the Molinari Society session, I also enjoyed the ARS session, and the AAPSS session (in which I was a participant) was by all reports a good one. Lots of good meals, and lots of good discussions with many people, including a long conversation with Jacob Levy on different ways of interpreting the ethical issues in Watchmen. I'll write something about that conversation, but not now; terrible sinus cold makes thinking difficult. Meanwhile, happy new year to all L&P readers and co-bloggers.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
holiday diversions
Roderick, Amy, I'm expecting you to try to outgeek me here.
 |
I received 92 credits on The Sci Fi Sounds Quiz How much of a Sci-Fi geek are you? |
| Guess the Sci-Fi Movie Sounds hereCanon powershot | |
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
News From Middle Earth
Papers are all graded; waiting for final exams to roll in, so, surfing around. What do I find? Great News: Peter Jackson and New Line have resolved their differences, and have agreed to make a film of The Hobbit. Also -- Not Necessarily Great News: The 2-movie deal includes The Hobbit and something descibed ominously as "a sequel." Meaning what, something Tolkien didn't write concerning the years between The Hobbit and LOTR? Do not want. UPDATE: According to AICN, "The second project is believed to be a bridge between THE HOBBIT and THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy - culled from the titanic amount of periphery/ancillary/notated material found in Tolkien's works." So, maybe it'll be ok. I'll keep an open mind; PJ's credibility with me is good.
(Can't believe I scooped Roderick on this.)
Friday, December 7, 2007
Good reads
The Winter 07 issue of Democratiya is now available, featuring many articles of interest to L&P readers. (Roderick and I will be eager to read Carrie-Ann Biondi's review of Nancy Sherman's book on stoicism and the military.)
Monday, December 3, 2007
DeLong on Schumpeter
Brad DeLong on Schumpeter in the Chronicle.
Good piece.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
New issue of Reason Papers
I am happy to report that Reason Papers #29 is due back from the printers any day now, so any orders received soonish will be filled before the end of the semester. Ordering info is on the website, www.reasonpapers.com. But while I’m here, let me disclose the contents.
The articles include Angelo Codevilla’s response to the symposium papers about him which were featured in #28, as well as the proceedings of the recent Society for Value Inquiry meeting which featured an exchange between James Sterba and Tibor Machan. The other articles are:
Morality and the Foundations of Practical Reason by Brian Zamulinski
A Unified Theory of Intrinsic Value by Stephen Kershnar
Relativism and Progress by Howard Darmstadter
Are You in a Dilemma? What Disturbing Choices Say about Our Character by Jason Swedene
Respect for Persons and the Authority of Morality by Matt Zwolinski
Lomasky on Practical Reason: Personal Value and Metavalues by Shane Courtland
Political Obligations and the Duties of Friends by Nkiruka Ahiauzu
An Economic, Political, and Philosophical Analysis of Externalities by Brian P. Simpson
Plumb-Line Libertarianism: A Critique of Hoppe by Walter Block
Also, a review essay by James Stacey Taylor on Amy E. White’s Virtually Obscene: The Case for an Uncensored Internet and a review by Jordon Barkalow of Isaiah Berlin’s Political Ideas in the Romantic Age: Their Rise and Influence on Modern Thought
This issue begins what I hope is a new regime of production quality and efficiency. Not only did I switch printers, but I have been fortunate enough to secure the assistance of two talented individuals to serve as Managing Editors: Carrie-Ann Biondi and Irfan Khawaja. I am delighted with the results. Oh, and did I mention that the archive section on the website features full-text PDFs of all of No. 1-27? How cool is that?
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Big Moments in Con Law
This is one. Cert granted in Heller v. DC, which now has the Supremes ruling on whether the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right or merely the right of states to have militias. VC is all over it, go read. I hope to have more tomorrow, but it's a very busy week.
A good read
Good column by Don and Karol Boudreaux on the connection between civilization and commerce.
Friday, November 16, 2007
A CFP of interest to L&P people
Just received this CFP. I am not involved with this in any way, but it seemed interesting, and it's something L&P readers (and co-bloggers) might have an interest in. So here it is. If you're interested, reply to the contact info given below.
First Conference on Liberty Studies
What is Liberty Studies?
5 - 6 April 2008
The College of New Jersey
Ewing, New Jersey
Call for Papers
The first annual Liberty Studies Conference, sponsored by The Center for Liberty Studies, will be held this April 5 - 6 at The College of New Jersey in Ewing New Jersey. The theme of our conference is "What is Liberty Studies?" This conference will put forth various ideas of what would constitute Liberty Studies by starting a debate and discussion concerning what undergraduate students ought to be learning about liberty. We are looking to disseminate substantive ideas that professors can consider for their own classes and home institutions.
Papers are welcome on any topic in liberty and from any discipline. We are looking for submissions that are accessible to a wide audience. Bibliographies and works cited should be limited to those works that either will be directly used in the classroom or are deemed important for instructor reference. Reading time of papers should be approximately 20 minutes. Accepted papers will be published in the new online Journal of Liberty Studies.
Abstracts of no less than 250 words are due by January 15th. Email submissions to conference@libertystudies.org Early submission is encouraged.
For more information about Liberty Studies and The Center for Liberty Studies, please visit our website at www.libertystudies.org
This year we are holding our conference in conjunction with the 35th Conference on Value Inquiry "Values and Medicine". For information on the Conference on Value Inquiry got to www.valueinquiry.net
Thursday, November 15, 2007
obit
Just learned that legal historian Harold Berman has died. (Hat tip: Jacob Levy) His Law and Revolution is a must-read, especially if you're interested in Hayekian appraoches to philosophy of law. (There's also a vol II.)
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
High Standards
I have no idea what the algortihm is, but:
Get a Cash Advance
Good to know we're maintaining high standards.Tuesday, November 6, 2007
More on the Guy
Jacob Levy has a terrific (and amusing) post on Guy Fawkes, modern libertarianism, and Ron Paul. I can't adequately convey it other than by linking to it. Go have a look.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Almost missed it!
Happy Guy Fawkes Day! If you still haven’t read Alan Moore and David Lloyd’s V for Vendetta, now would be a good time. (The freedom fighter/protagonist wears a Guy Fawkes mask, in case you were wondering about the seeming non-sequitur.) It’s a terrific story. If all you know is the recent film version, let me tell you that the book is much better. I enjoyed the film on a certain level, but there’s no comparison. It's not just about why fascism or totalitarianism is bad, it's about why freedom is good. And it makes some good distinctions about liberty and licentiousness, and what anarchy might really mean.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Good news for a change
Genarlow Wilson is free. Strikes me as slightly odd to use the 8th Amendment as a rationale, but IANAL, and in any case I think justice is served by this outcome.
UPDATE: Eugene Volokh argues that the rationale works pretty well. His analysis here at VC.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Sad End
Via Roderick's other blog, I've just learned that Laissez-Faire Books is closing their business. As Roderick notes, the rationale is understandable, but I can't help note the event with sadness. I remember when they were a physical store in Manhattan, and many times when I was in Grad school I would go up there, often with my friend Dan Schmutter. I picked up many books there which contributed to my education in classical liberalism, things which for the most part wouldn't have occurred to most of my professors. The store, and later the catalogue, was an open door for me into a world which otherwise might have remained obscure. Not just philosophy and economics, either: I discovered Steve Ditko's brilliant Static via LFB also. The more I think about this, the sadder I'm getting, but I have a 9:30 class to teach, so this will have to do for now. :-(
Monday, August 27, 2007
AAPSS meeting this Dec.
If any philosophy-minded L&P readers will be in Baltimore this December for the APA meetings (that’s American Philosophical Association; I realize there are 3 or 4 APAs), here is the program for the American Association for the Philosophic Study of Society:
THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATION
EASTERN DIVISION
ONE HUNDRED FOURTH ANNUAL MEETING PROGRAM
DECEMBER 27-30, 2007
BALTIMORE MARRIOTT WATERFRONT AND OTHER HOTELS
SATURDAY AFTERNOON, DECEMBER 29, 2007
GROUP SESSION IX - 2:45-5:45 P.M.
GIX-1. American Association for the Philosophic Study of Society
2:45-5:45 p.m., Iron (Fourth Floor)
Topic: Two New Books on Justification and the State
Chair: Douglas Rasmussen (St. John's University)
1: Daniel Shapiro, Is The Welfare State Justified?
Critics: Jerry Gaus (University of Arizona)
James Sterba (University of Notre Dame)
Author: Daniel Shapiro (West Virginia University)
2: Aeon Skoble, Deleting the State
Critics: Stephen Kershnar (State University of New York-Fredonia)
Aaron Garrett (Boston University)
Author: Aeon Skoble (Bridgewater State College)
In Which I Reaquaint Myself With My Desk
Ok, so, back from vacation. Spent a couple weeks on Burntside Lake in northern MN, and briefer, 2-3 day trips to Seal Cove ME, and North Conway NH. I also got caught up on some entertainment I had fallen behind on – e.g., I finally finished the Baroque Cycle, which was great, and rented Casino Royale, which was terrific. Actually managed to get to the theater to see the 3rd Bourne movie, which I enjoyed, and the Simpsons movie, which was a scream. Did a decent amount of work also, and now gearing up for the new semester. I would guess there’ll be lots of blogging to do also. I’m interested in the Ron Paul campaign’s progress. Does he actually have a shot? Or is that just wishful thinking?
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
More on Finklestein
Cathy Young at Reason has this report. Her credibility is excellent, IMO, so I feel like my semi-informed reactions a couple weeks ago were justified.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Big Brother Wants To Read Your Email
I'm pleased and proud that a short piece I wrote for The Freeman a couple years back has been selected by FEE for today's "Timely Classic." You can judge for yourself whether it's classic, but it's definitely timely. Well, sort of: it's from 1999, so the references to the Clinton administration aren't timely, but the prinicples at stake are: see here for the latest from the FBI
Saturday, June 2, 2007
Misinterpretation?
According to this news story, we've all been misinterpreting Bradbury's Farenheit 451. Interesting. Guess I'll have to reread it now.
Hat tip: Fark
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Jew See This?
The NYT reports that “The main union representing 120,000 British college teachers voted Wednesday to endorse a Palestinian trades’ union call for a boycott of Israeli academic institutions.” I didn’t notice any similar resolutions concerning academics in China, or Iran, or in the old USSR, or in Syria, or in Cuba. Hmm. Yes, we're having a sale on Wagner this week. Wagner, Max! Anyway, let me save everyone a lot of time and trouble. Cue the script – Move 1: a commenter asks what’s the big deal. Move 2: I complain that this smacks of anti-semitism. Move 3: comments flood in reminding me that criticizing Israel isn’t identical with anti-semitism. Move 4: I reply that yes, I know that, but the plain double-standard evidenced here reveals a special animus. Move 5: some comments to the effect that since no state has the right to exist, Israel doesn’t either. Move 6: I reply that as long as any states can exist, Israel can too, and to say otherwise is anti-semitism. Move 7: Angry comments pour in about Israeli misdeeds. Move 8: I link to FLAME and AICE. Move 9: I express bewilderment that antipathy towards Israel is so prevalent on the left as well as in several wings of the libertarian world. Move 10: I get lectured on how I’m not really a libertarian at all, accompanied by some ad hominem. Move 11: I close the comments thread.
Seriously, though, and leaving the anti-Israel/anti-semitism thing alone, this seems like an amazingly anti-intellectual thing to do. "We don't like your government's policies, so we won't allow your chemists to co-author papers, etc." Absurd.
Friday, April 20, 2007
I Should Copyright This
In comments threads here at L&P, at Ralph Luker's blog, and at Volokh Conspiracy, I seem to have hit on a great new expression. Rather than passively accept the government euphemism "gun-free zones," I've started referring to "mandatory defenselessness zones." That's primarily for striking rhetorical effect, but it's basically truth: Calling something a "gun-free zone" doesn't mean that criminals and lunatics won't bring guns there- but it does mean that regular people will get in trouble if they do.
Shots Heard 'Round the World
It's April 20th. D'OH!! That means for the second year in a row, I am late blogging about one of the most important days in American history, April 19th, the anniversary of the battles of Lexington and Concord. I meant to, but it's been crazy around here. Anyway, here's to the brave individuals who took up arms to protect their liberty.
Mill and Metallica
Hey, here's an essay on Mill's philosophy of individualism and the metal band Metallica. I frequently write on popular culture, but it didn't occur to me to write this! Interesting take, have a look. It's being hosted by Liberty magazine, and will appear in about 2 weeks in the book Metallica and Philosophy, edited by my friend and collaborator William Irwin.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Terrific Essay on Virginia Tech
In the Chronicle of Higher Ed, no reg nec. Really spot-on analysis that affirms the concept of personal responsibility.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Two Thoughts on Virginia Tech
First, although none of the victims of the V.T. massacre deserved what they got, I was especially struck by the obit/profile of Professor Liviu Lebrescu, who survived the Nazis and the Communists, and died a hero: “According to media accounts quoting students,” the NYT reports, “Mr. Librescu and the class heard shooting in a nearby room. The students said their professor blocked the door to prevent the gunman from entering while some students took cover underneath desks and others leaped out from windows.” Amazing guy. UPDATE: Eugene Volokh has more on Prof. Lebrescu.
Second, the gun-control issue. As David and Lester have noted, we have here a clear example of how disarming the people makes everyone less safe. The NYT letters-to-the-editor this morning (go look, no reg nec) are interesting. While some are of the predictable “guns should be banned” variety, others make the case that calling something a “gun-free zone” doesn’t mean anything, and that disarmed people are defenseless people, and that the responsibility lies with the deranged character of the perpetrator rather than some abstraction like “gun culture.” See especially the third and sixth letters. (Bonus: that #3 letter is by L&P reader Daniel Schumtter. Kudos!)
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
If I Lived in Montreal...
I'd go to this: Hume and Smith on Justice, Sympathy, and Commerce McGill University April 13, 2007. Looks like good stuff.
Friday, March 30, 2007
God
I don't know whether Eric Clapton reads L&P, but if he does: Happy Birthday!
Friday, March 23, 2007
That Pesky 1st Amendment
Good news for a change: I just read in the NYT that “A federal judge in Philadelphia yesterday struck down a 1998 law that made it a crime for Web sites to allow children to gain access to material deemed “harmful.”” (BTW, this is the free part of the NYT, no reg required.) “Senior Judge Lowell A. Reed Jr. of Federal District Court ruled that the law was ineffective, overly broad and at odds with free speech rights. Judge Reed added that there were far less restrictive methods like software filters that parents could use to control their children’s Internet use.” In explaining his rationale for what critics will call a pro-porn decision (NTTAWWT), the judge said “perhaps we do the minors of this country harm if First Amendment protections, which they will with age inherit fully, are chipped away in the name of their protection.” Well said!
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Good distinction
Fascinating discussion over at Cato's website about Brian Doherty's new book. The whole exchange is well worthwhile, but I was especially prompted to blog Tom Palmer's post in which he makes a really interesting distinction between promoting liberty and promoting libertarianism.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Democratiya
Here's an interesting new web journal, Democratiya. Ok, it's not actually new, but I just heard of it this week. Its editorial board inlcudes many big names from many different perspectives and disciplines. Looks to have a lot of food for thought for L&P readers. Bonus: former HNN blogger Irfan Khawaja has a review essay on Richard Posner's new book here, which is sure to be an interesting read.
Why Left and Right Misread "300"
Neal Stephenson had a great op-ed column in Sunday’s NYT (no reg required, apparently) on why most people, left and right, get 300 wrong, and why geeks rule. Worth a read. I have noticed that even libertarian opinion varies on Frank Miller. I think The Dark Knight Returns touches on many themes that are liberty-friendly, and the Give Me Liberty/Martha Washington series are explicitly libertarian. But YMMV I guess. I'll be open to further discussion of this after I've had a chance to see 300 myself, which I'll do Friday if I get enough writing done before that.
On a related note, the Comics Reporter had a great line when weighing in on various opinions about 300: “for those of us of a certain age it's hard to get past the fact that we live in a world where the success of Frank Miller movies are a topic in the first place. It's like having to discuss Vice-President Gygax.” Best. Analogy. Evar.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Comic geeking intersects politics
This blogpost on Iron Man will be good reading for those L&P readers who are also comics readers. The author makes a good point about retroactively making PC changes to classics. I didn't even realize that the PC retconning had taken place; that's a real shame. (Hat tip: Comics Reporter)
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
H.H. W.H.
Howard Hunt has died. If you don't recognize the name or understand why this is blogworthy, you are required to rent immediately All The President's Men.
Thursday, December 7, 2006
Maybe Huey or Louie?
This is one of the stupidest essays from the Chronicle I’ve seen in a while. It argues that Hannah Arendt seems so great because all the rest of 20th century political philosophers were lame. I don’t know Arendt well enough to have an opinion about whether or not she’s overrated; it might well be true. The author notes that her “two most famous books make opposite points,” and that she gets a lot of unearned mileage for being a “public intellectual.” But even if it’s true that she’s overrated, it’s certainly not attributable to the reasons given here! Dissed by omission are Nozick and Hayek, but the author goes out of his way to dis Rawls and Berlin. Author’s choice for last great American political philosopher? Dewey! Please.
Monday, December 4, 2006
South Park and the Free Market
As I’ve mentioned before, a lot of work being done these days on intersection of philosophy and popular culture is being done by libertarians and conservatives. It’s not all left-wing postmodernist nihilism. L&P readers might be familiar with the work of Paul Cantor, who often tries to incorporate insights from Austrian analysis into his work on both high and pop culture. He has an essay in the new book South Park and Philosophy, in which he uses the show to discuss the nature of the free market. (Cantor has also written on The Simpsons, among other things.)
Friday, December 1, 2006
Shameless self-promotion
It's Woody Allen's birthday, so time for me to sneak in a plug for my book.
Monday, November 20, 2006
Timely indeed
I'm pleased and flattered that FEE has selected my essay from Sept 2003 on conscription for its daily "Timely Classic." You can be the judge of whether it's classic, but it's definitely timely, as Charles Rangel, now in the majority party, has reissued his call for enslavement, er, sorry, conscription.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
MF RIP
David's post below is to a subscription-only site. This NYT link should be available to non-subscribers.
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Do not want
Well, the NY Times op-ed page just got a lot less sane. Libertarian columnist John Tierney has decided to leave the op-ed page (he'll still write science columns. (Here's the story and his last column, behind that foolish paywall). That's a real shame, since the vast majority of readers of the NYT op-ed page really needed some exposure to Tierney's persepctive. If you're reading this, Mr Tierney, thanks for all your hard work. You'll be missed.
Friday, November 10, 2006
More on the Greens
More on Rodericks's attempt to make an alliance with the Greens:
Jason's post immediately below is terrific. But it's even worse than that! I went through the entire document with the proverbial fine-toothed comb, and it's no contest.
1.Grassroots Democracy
“Every human being deserves a say in the decisions that affect their lives; no one should be subject to the will of another."
This is self-contradictory. I agree that no one should be subject to the will of another, but that’s exactly the objection to democracy, under which we are all subject to the will of another anytime we’re outnumbered.
2. Ecological Wisdom
“Human societies must operate with the understanding that we are part of nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance and live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our planet. We support a sustainable society that utilizes resources in such a way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices of our generation.”
Ok, but what are the resource limits? And what is the meaning of “sustainable”? That’s typically code for regulation and the precautionary principle.
“to this end we must have agricultural practices that replenish the soil; move to an energy efficient economy; and live in ways that respect the integrity of natural systems.”
“Must have” here seems to suggest (although I concede it need not) imposed rules.
3.Social Justice and Equal Opportunity
“All persons should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.“
As Jason has noted, this economic outcome-egalitarianism is not at all consistent with libertarianism, or even Rawlsian liberalism for that matter, and reveals an underlying assumption that “society” is the true “owner” of all resources.
“We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and heterosexism, ageism and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under the law.“
I know that this is the move Roderick wants to make about thick-versus-thin libertarianism, and I know that this is a key source of intra-libertarian dispute, even here at L&P. For now, though, let’s just note that the way it’s expressed here is sufficiently vague that we can’t tell whether it’s consistent with liberty or not.
4. Nonviolence
“It is essential that we develop effective alternatives to our current patterns of violence at all levels, from the family and the streets, to nations and the world. We will work to demilitarize our society and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, without being naive about the intentions of other governments. We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in helpless situations. We promote nonviolent methods to oppose practices and policies with which we disagree, and will guide our actions toward lasting personal, community and global peace.“
This doesn’t seem too bad, although again the vagueness is worrisome. Does “demilitarize our society” mean we stop invading other countries, or that the 2nd Amendment can be disregarded? Generic “nonviolence” positions are worthless if they don’t make the moral distinction between aggression and defense.
5. Decentralization
“Centralization of wealth and power contributes to social and economic injustice, environmental destruction, and militarization.”
Yes, largely due to the state and the ways in which wealth buys political power. In a radically libertarian society, this would be mitigated, and in any case, this conclusion:
“Therefore, we support a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions”
is radically inconsistent with liberty; again, there is the tacit assumption that markets are bad and that society is the proper owner of all resources, which may then be “distributed” in such a way as to achieve “social justice.”
“away from a system that is controlled by and mostly benefits the powerful few,”
That’s an argument against states, not wealth.
“Decision-making should, as much as possible, remain at the individual and local level, while assuring that civil rights are protected for all citizens.”
Well, that’s the real trick, isn’t it? Reconciling democratic decision-making with robust respect for rights (and here we see some artificial distinction between civil rights and property rights) has always been a tall order, and it only makes matters worse if you also think there should be egalitarian resource distribution.
6.Community-Based Economics
I’m already lost. All economics is community-based. What theory of economics are we talking about here?
“We recognize it is essential to create a vibrant and sustainable economic system, one that can create jobs and provide a decent standard of living, for all people, while maintaining a healthy ecological balance. A successful economic system will offer meaningful work with dignity, while paying a "living wage" which reflects the real value of a person's work.”
Oh, now I see: a Marxist theory.
“economic development that assures protection of the environment and workers' rights, broad citizen participation in planning, and enhancement of our "quality of life".“
Citizen participation in “planning”? That’s the market. Unless we’re talking about command-economy planning.
“We support independently owned and operated companies which are socially responsible,”
Socially responsible meaning what? Not, I presume, in the Milton Friedman sense. So then they must mean that companies are only permitted if they mesh with the politically correct set of values and outcomes.
7. Feminism
“We have inherited a social system based on male domination of politics and economics. We call for the replacement of the cultural ethics of domination and control, with more cooperative ways of interacting which respect differences of opinion and gender. Human values such as equity between the -sexes, interpersonal responsibility, and honesty must be developed with moral conscience. We should remember that the process that determines our decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we want.”
Ok.
8. Respect for Diversity
“We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of respectful relationships across these lines.”
Sounds good, but let’s see where they go with it:
“We believe the many diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and decision-making bodies”
Ah, so if the society is 37% Minority A, then 37% of all CEOs and surgeons and Senators and college professors must be Minority A?
“we support the leadership of people who have been traditionally closed out of leadership roles.”
I think they mean “people from ethnicities other members of which have in the past been closed out of…” This is an anti-individualist way of thinking of people.
“We acknowledge and encourage respect for other life forms and the preservation of biodiversity.”
While I think Spock was right not to want to kill the Horta, was not the Vampire Cloud also the only one of its kind? Some life forms are a threat to humanity. When respect for biodiversity becomes misanthropic, I draw the line.
9. Personal and Global Responsibility
“We encourage individuals to act to improve their personal well being and, at the same time, to enhance ecological balance and social harmony. We seek to join with people and organizations around the world to foster peace, economic justice, and the health of the planet. “
Sounds good, but there’s that expression “economic justice” again, which they seem to interpret not in free market terms but in terms of egalitarian redistribution.
10.Future Focus and Sustainability
“Our actions and policies should be motivated by long-term goals. We seek to protect valuable natural resources, safely disposing of or "unmaking" all waste we create, while developing a sustainable economics that does not depend on continual expansion for survival. We must counter-balance the drive for short-term profits by assuring that economic development, new technologies, and fiscal policies are responsible to future generations who will inherit the results of our actions.”
“Our” policies? Command economy? And how do we “assure” outcomes as prescribed here?
That’s 1 out of 10. I fail to see how this platform can even remotely be shoehorned into libertarianism. The author of this platform fundamentally fails to see how markets work, or how liberty is indivisible, or how democratic institutions are in conflict with rights, or what it means for rights to be compossible. If Roderick can convince someone who holds all these views to actually respect individual liberty and not be aggressive, he’s the best salesman since Ron Popeil. I think very highly of Roderick, but I don’t see it happening.
Sunday, November 5, 2006
Worth a moment's reflection
Happy Guy Fawkes Day everyone!
Thursday, November 2, 2006
See below
I just made a lengthy comment to David's last post, which on reflection should have been a post of my own. So go look. Short version: I remain unconvinced that's there's not much difference between Dems and GOP in the aggregate (obviously in any particular race, one might be clearly better than the other).
While I'm here, some shameless self-promotion: any L&P readers at the Univ of Wisc, feel free to come to a talk I'm giving next Wednesday.
Friday, October 20, 2006
Law and Order: 87th Precinct?
I don't know whether any L&P readers watch the “Special Victims Unit” iteration of the Law and Order franchise, but something about this past Tuesday’s episode has been bothering me and I couldn’t figure out how to contact the producers of the show, so I’m just going to tell you. (And if you know how to contact the producers, please let me know.)
The problem is, this past Tuesday’s SVU episode was flagrantly plagiarized from an Ed McBain “87th Precinct” novel from 1984 (iirc) called Lightning. It was unmistakable: A serial rapist comes back to rape his victims a second or even third time because he's specifically trying to impregnate them - he's spying on them and using calendars to note menstrual cycles etc. The only difference between the two is the reason why he wants to impregnate them, and that it’s the NYPD SVU rather than the 87th precinct of the Isola PD that works the case. Intentional plagiarism? Unconscious? Coincidence? If anyone knows what’s going on, or how I might bring this to the attention of the producers, let me know. If any of you thinks I watch too much TV, let me know that also.
Wednesday, October 4, 2006
The Blogging Resumes
Ok, now that my self-imposed moratorium in blogging has been lifted, I can discharge my obligation to respond to having been tagged by Division of Labour’s Frank Stephenson in the “one-book” meme. Below the fold.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
NYT Trek appreciation
I still haven't found the time to write a long tribute to Star Trek on its 40th anniversary, but this NYT op-ed is pretty good, esp. the first two thirds or so.
Friday, September 8, 2006
Happy Birthday to an old friend
40 years ago today, Star Trek premiered. I don't have time to write the long appreciation that it deserves (Amy? Roderick?), but at its best, it was great science fiction television. When I was watching it as a kid growing up, I learned a lot from it about optimism, and human potential, and diversity (IDIC!), and so on. I can still answer trivia questions and recite dialogue, without cheating with the internet. I confess I never warmed up to the overly PC (and frequently derivative) Next Gen, or any of the subsequent spinoffs, and was underwhelmed by all the films. And the original show had it's share of silliness, most often in the third season. But it was great stuff. Perhaps next week I'll have a chance to write more, but I couldn't let the anniversary slip by unnoticed. Comments welcome, but I'd really prefer not to get into flamey arguments about Next Gen etc. UPDATE: This, however, is surely a bad idea. Assassins!!
Thursday, August 31, 2006
There is nothing wrong with your television.
Popular Culture Item of Significance:
Joseph Stefano has died. In addition to writing the screenplay for Psycho, he was co-creator of the influential and important TV series, The Outer Limits. RIP!
Monday, August 28, 2006
So, yes, I'm back
Vacation is over. I spent most of it at Burntside Lake in northern MN, on one of the islands near the center of this satellite photo. Also spent some time in Seal Cove, Maine. Now back to work, and believe me, it has accululated in my absence. So, light-to-no blogging til I get caught up, but I thought I'd check in.
More philosophy news
I'm happy to announce the following session of the American Association for the Philosophic Study of Society, at the December meeting of the American Philosophical Association.
THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATION
EASTERN DIVISION
ONE HUNDRED THIRD ANNUAL MEETING PROGRAM
THURSDAY MORNING, DECEMBER 28, 2006
GROUP SESSION II - 9:00-11:00 A.M.
GII-1. American Association for the Philosophic Study of Society
9:00-11:00 a.m., Wilson B (Mezzanine Level)
Topic: Author Meets Critics: Jan Narveson's Respecting Persons in Theory and Practice
Chair: Tibor R. Machan (Chapman University)
Critics: Irfan Khawaja (City University of New York-John Jay College of Criminal Justice)
Carrie-Ann Biondi (City University of New York- John Jay College of Criminal Justice)
Matt Zwolinski (University of San Diego)
Author: Jan Narveson (University of Waterloo)
Bonus: doesn't conflict with the Molinari Society meeting.
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Shameless self-promotion
FYI, I'll be interviewed tomorrow on Wisconsin Public Radio's "Here on Earth" show, from 3:00-3:30 Wisconsin time, which is 4:00-4:30 eastern. For those of you who don't live in Wisconsin, webcast instructions are beneath the fold. Topic will be The Simpsons.
Thursday, July 6, 2006
Machan online
Stephan Kinsella has (with permissions) put up a PDF of Tibor Machan's The Moral Case for a Free Market Economy. Good stuff therein, have a look.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Reason Papers volume 28
Update on Reason Papers no. 28: The print shop is working on correcting the error I mentioned here, and I hope to be able to send out copies to the subscribers soon. Meanwhile, those of you who aren’t subscribers should feel free to start sending in your orders. Ordering info is here. Also meanwhile, with some timely tech assistance from Stephan Kinsella and David Veksler (thanks guys!), I have resolved the website maintenance problems I encountered the other day, so the main RP website has been updated. That means, also, that all of RP 26 is now available for free download.
RP 28 is a special issue on war and liberty, 90% of which was guest-edited by Carrie-Ann Biondi and Irfan Khawaja, and it looks great. It predominantly features a symposium on Angelo Codevilla's No Victory, No Peace (and a future issue will include his reply), and it also includes the proceedings of the 2003 AAPSS symposium on war and liberty, which featured papers by myself and by L&P co-blogger Roderick Long (and which I’ve been promising L&P readers I’d make available – now done!) Rounding out the war section is an essay by Timothy Sandefur on the Civil War. RP 28 also includes part 2 of the 2-part Walter Block opus which began in RP 27. The book section features reviews of Roger Kimball’s book on art and Hilary Putnam’s book on the fact/value dichotomy, plus a longer essay by Steven Sanders on Stephen Hicks’ book on postmodernism. While you’ll have to buy the issue to see most of this without waiting, there are a few pieces available for free download now. Big thanks to Stephan Kinsella for mad skillz with the PDFs.
Mr. Key, please phone your office
Perhaps I should be jaded enough not to be bothered by this anymore, but the perennial recurrence of the “debate” over a constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration drives me bonkers. 1, it’s so transparently more about partisan hackery than it is about any substantive issue (“my opponent even voted for flag-burning!”) 2, it suggests that there’s no such thing as private property. If it’s my flag, it’s up to me whether to desecrate it. This seems to me exactly analogous to the classic thought-experiment about some art collector having the right to deface his newest acquisition, the Mona Lisa. While compelling moral arguments might be made to the effect that he ought not to do so, legally it is pretty obviously his prerogative. He’d have the legal right to keep it in his living room and never display it again, right? From my point of view, what’s the difference? Whether it’s locked up in his house or ripped to shreds, I don’t get to see it anymore. The whole point of property is that you get to determine its use. So if the government wants to ban the desecration of government-owned flags, great. But if it’s a mass-produced object that I can buy at Target, then the one I’ve bought is mine, and you don’t get to tell me what to do with it, at least not in a country where there’s such a thing as private property. They haven’t repealed that yet. And 3, it’s so stupidly contradictory – Arlen Specter, e.g., says it’s not just speech, but an action designed to antagonize. So, when you burn the flag, you’re pretty much flipping the bird to the USA and offending its supporters. Well, yes. Congratulations, Mr. Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, you’ve just discovered the point of the First Amendment. It’s precisely because it’s an offensive and inflammatory political statement that it’s an example of what the First Amendment is meant to protect. Senator Hatch said that the flag is a symbol and hence (huh?) needed protection. Um, I don’t think that’s your best move. The Nazi flag was a symbol of the Third Reich and therefore of the principles of national socialism. I can see burning a Nazi flag at a rally protesting national socialism, can’t you? What principles does our flag represent? Freedom? Yeah, that’s what I thought. You can’t save the Bill of Rights by poking lots of holes in it.
UPDATE: Amazingly, the anti-First Amendment crowd fell one vote short. Good news for a change, accompanied by more overblown rhetoric. Bill Frist noted, lamenting the bill's failure, that many soldiers had died for the flag. I hope not! I prefer to think they died for what the flag represents, not the flag itself.
Monday, June 26, 2006
Consumers have choices in a market economy
Which is why Reason Papers #28 will be delayed a few more days, and why #29 will be printed by a different printing company. I'd announce this at the RP website, too, if I could only get past security - for some reason it's not accepting uploads and I can't update the site. I'll let you know when I've resolved the problem.
Friday, June 23, 2006
Book Reviews ≠ Trend Pieces
Reviewing Seinfeld, Master of Its Domain, edited by David Lavery and Sara Lewis Dunne, in June 19th’s The Weekly Standard, Max Watman (this link may not work)notes the lameness of some of the pomo essays, then concludes of scholars: “They have become sadly inured to the tedium of television, and with their minds dulled by it, have taken up the only topic they grasp. But since they have only television, they aren't bright enough to illuminate anything. And it dawns on the reader that the existence of this book is proof that they ought not to teach television at our universities.” Where I come from, we call that “the fallacy of hasty generalization.” I haven’t read this book. It’s possible that every essay is, in fact, terrible. I doubt it, but let’s just stipulate arguendo that they are: It would still be groundless to jump from the weakness of one particular book to the bankruptcy of an entire field.
First of all, the fact that a professor writes an essay about Seinfeld, or even makes a reference to Seinfeld in class, isn’t the same thing as “teaching Seinfeld.” Now I realize that there are college courses on TV – typically in mass comm., or lit, and even sometimes in philosophy, but I think what’s more prevalent is the incorporation of popular culture reference points into otherwise-standard courses. For instance, if I were teaching a straightforward intro-to-ethics class, using Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Mill, and the other usual suspects, I might nevertheless illuminate a particular point by referring to a Seinfeld episode. (Yes, I’ve written on this.)
Second of all, it’s not necessarily bad to teach a course involving a TV show, provided that it’s done responsibly – e.g., by using an analysis of the show as means to hook into the same universal themes and ideas that any fiction does. I myself do this infrequently, but I know folks who do it more regularly, and I can tell from their syllabi that they’re doing real work. Any particular prof could, of course, be an idiot, but that’s not an indictment of an entire methodology. Watman might have been more justified showing how pomo silliness trivializes all literary studies, but it’s not just pomo studies of TV which do this, pomo studies of any art form have this effect. In other words, the proper objection to nihilistic pomo TV studies isn’t that it’s about TV, it’s that it’s nihilistic pomo omphaloskepsis.
Even if Watman is right about this book, why should that mean that college professors should, as a rule, not discuss popular culture in the classroom or write essays about it? Often, the essays on popular culture subjects can be used to introduce readers to more substantive areas of inquiry. Other times, the popular culture item can be an excellent subject for a particular exploration. Not to get all tu quoque or anything, but Watman’s claim to fame is a book on horse racing – why is there something potentially profound and interesting about horse racing, but not TV?
Again, I haven’t read this book – maybe it’s as bad as Watman says. In that case, he would have done better to pan the book for its own flaws, rather than try to score trendspotting points by lumping together all the recent work on popular culture.
An afterthought – since he’s writing for a conservative magazine, he might have been hoping to hook into some generalized “we don’t like left-wing academics” meme among the readership, but as it happens, many of the people writing on the intersection of their disciplines with popular culture are conservatives or libertarians. So the moral of the story is: review the book you were assigned to review, and don’t think it’s necessarily part of some trend.
The Death Tax, yet again
They've been arguing in Congress again about the estate tax, aka the death tax, so I guess I might as well link to the archived column I wrote on this subject for The Freeman back in 2001. It was one of their "It Just Ain't So!" columns, which they use to reply to some popular misconception - a great feature. (NB - the contact info and ID are no longer correct, of course; use the info available on the masthead above.) Being a moral argument, the piece isn't especially dated. (Short version: death tax bad. But I actually have an argument to that effect.)
Hat tip: Frank Stephenson at Division of Labour, who has been posting a lot of great stuff the last couple days. (Yes, I'm actually hat-tipping another blogger for reminding me to post links to my own writing.)
Another (qualifiedly) cool cartoon
This one is fun. An excellent demonstration of some basic economics. They start to lose me when they get to the part about why we need to pay our taxes, but then they partially redeem themselves by showing why it's bad when taxes get too high. Another minus is a sort of anti-Higgsian move: they show how government increased interference during WWII, but then claim (plainly falsely) that afterwards, all freedoms were restored. All in all though, not bad -- indeed, people today could learn a lot from this. Interesting too was how this same production company seems less sanguine about the role of government in this 1954 film than they did in the ones I blogged yesterday, which were from 1948.
(HT to one of Paul's commenters)
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
The Profit Motive, via cartoon
This 40's vintage cartoon about economics is pretty great. (My qualification is due to the part about taxation being socially beneficial rather than a drain on the productivity which the cartoon otherwise champions. All in all, though, pretty awesome.) (Hat tip: Paul Hsieh) Update: this one is also pretty great. (Same googlevid source.)
Monday, June 19, 2006
Exploring the Ideas of Liberty
I’ve just returned from an exhausting yet rewarding week of teaching at an IHS summer seminar. One question which I hear a lot is, what do you enjoy about teaching these? The first thing that comes to mind is that they’re interdisciplinary: my philosophy lectures are mixed in with lectures from two economists, a historian, and a lit professor. As far as I can tell, this gives the students a far more complete picture of how the ideas work and how the disciplines relate to each other. It helps, also, that the other seminar faculty are awesome – in terms of being great teachers generally, and specifically being able to present material that makes the connections so clear to the students and enables us to hook into each others’ themes. Being on a team with excellent faculty helps bring out the best in me, so public thanks to Elizabeth Hull from Bethany College, my former USMA colleague Rob McDonald, IHS mainstay Howie Baetjer, and “Division of Labour” blogger Frank Stephenson. Frank has scooped me on blogging this – have a look. (L&P co-blogger Amy Sturgis was supposed to be joining us, but couldn’t make it – we missed you Amy!) It’s also a lot of fun to have such bright and curious and motivated students, and to help them explore the ideas of liberty. So, a big shout-out to the Institute for Humane Studies – thanks, and keep up the good work. The rest of my summer will be some combination of writing and swimming. And yard work.
Monday, May 29, 2006
Clarence Beeks??
A great character actor I always enjoyed, Paul Gleason, has died. Obit here. Check him out on IMDB -- impressive list ranging from Trading Places to Miami Vice, although he's probably better known for the Breakfast Club and Die Hard.
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
News Part 2
I am pleased to announce the program for the 2006 session of the American Association for the Philosophical Study of Society, meeting in conjunction with the Eastern Division meeting of the American Philosophical Association, in Washington DC, Dec. 27-30. (The exact time and location of the AAPSS session is TBD.)
Author Meets Critics: Jan Narveson's Respecting Persons in Theory and Practice
Session Chair/Moderator: Tibor R. Machan (Chapman University)
Speakers:
Irfan Khawaja (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, CUNY)
Carrie-Ann Biondi (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, CUNY)
Matt Zwolinski (Univ. of San Diego)
Respondent:
Jan Narveson (Univ of Waterloo)
Sounds like an excellent panel, if I do say so myself.
News Part 1
Issue 28 of Reason Papers will be going to the printer next week and should be available shortly thereafter. The bulk of RP28 is a special War and Liberty section guest-edited by Irfan Khawaja and Carrie-Ann Biondi (who until a day or so ago were HNN bloggers – what on earth has happened to the “Theory and Practice” blog??). The highlights are a symposium on Codevilla’s book No Victory, No Peace, and the proceedings of the 2004 AAPSS symposium on War and Liberty, featuring Roderick Long and me. Here is an advance peek at Irfan’s introduction to the Codevilla section.
Monday, May 22, 2006
It's criminal because I say so!
To start the week on a cheery note, the
Attorney General says that “The government has the legal authority to prosecute journalists for publishing classified information,” or more (less?) precisely, that “There are some statutes on the book which, if you read the language carefully, would seem to indicate that that is a possibility." Ok, you get back to us on that right away. It gets worse, both politically and logically. After the obligatory lip-service to the First Amendment, the AG said “But it can't be the case that that right trumps over the right that Americans would like to see, the ability of the federal government to go after criminal activity.” Note the circular reasoning? They need the power to prosecute criminal activity, so they need to define criminal activity as that which they want to prosecute.
Thursday, May 18, 2006
My white hood is at the cleaners
It's official: everyone at L&P is a racist, according to Seattle. Apparently, the new definition of racism includes "emphasizing individualism" over "more collective ideology." Hat tip: VC (Interesting comments thread, too, but on a different facet of this topic.) Update: Radley Balko has more.
Monday, May 8, 2006
More on M&W
This TNR essay is important, also. Unfortunately, it's registration-required. But you're savvy enough to get around that, aren't you?
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Addio Kira
Italian actress Alida Valli has died at 84. Notable films include the noir classic The Third Man, Hitchcock's The Paradine Case, and the 1942 Italian film of We the Living, which is beautifully filmed and quite moving, and a more successful screen adaptation of an Ayn Rand novel than the American film of The Fountainhead. True story: I had never read any Rand, but when the restored version of this film was released, my curiosity was piqued, and I went to see it, and was amazed. It was seeing this Italian film, and Valli's performance as Kira, that prompted me to read Rand, whose novels I continue to regard as woefully underrated. Anyway, ciao Alida, RIP.
UPDATE: On rereading the NYT obit, I couldn't help but notice that they describe We the Living as "an anti-communist film." It is, of course, but it's anti-fascist as well. "Anti-totalitarian" or "anti-collectivist" would be more complete descriptions, and, given the historical use of the expression "anti-communist" in America, less misleading. Just a thought.
UPDATE 2: David Boaz has more here.
Thursday, April 6, 2006
Law and Star Trek
Interesting comment thread on law and Star Trek following this VC post. UPDATE: Another thread, following up some of the same themes but with a wider "sci-fi and decentralization" scope.
Fairness Doctrine
Our L&P co-blogger "Protagoras" has a fantastic post up today - next time why not cross-post?
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Immigration
Virginia Postrel has posted a link today to this 11-year-old story that’s as relevant now as it was then. Go read.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Forgotten Founder
Now that George Mason University has made the NCAA Final Four, some may wonder who the school is named after. Answer here. Well worth learning about or reminding oneself. Or pass it on to your students. (Hat tip: Todd Zywicki at VC)
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Paging Prof. Santayana
Yes, by all means, let's make the same mistakes all over again. And let's be sure that we do not assume the costs of our decisions. < / sarc off>
Monday, March 20, 2006
New Threat to National Security?
At least according to the TSA: Returning from a Liberty Fund conference on Shaftesbury, I was forbidden to fly with one of my humble scholarly tools. (L&P co-blogger "Protagoras" was there also, and he owns one of these - I wonder whether he got away with it?) Thanks to some entrpreneur, I was able to mail it to myself (for a six dollar fee) from the security checkpoint rather than have it confiscated, but I still found the whole experience annoying and insulting. They didn't fuss over my folding umbrella, with which I could do far more damage were I so inclined. (And of course, Protagoras is himself a lethal weapon! But he probably didn't mention that.) Other than that, the conference was fascinating, and afforded me a close look at a figure I'd never studied before.
Tuesday, March 7, 2006
Meme-of-Four
I take up Roderick’s tagging-without-tagging “meme of four” - below the fold.
Tuesday, February 7, 2006
Succinctly Speaking
“Civil society means that free expression trumps the emotions of anyone to whom free expression might be inconvenient.” Go Hitch!
Monday, January 30, 2006
Legitimate prerogative or child abuse?
I found something disturbing about the parents' lack of concern for their own children in this story in Sunday's NYT Magazine. Is this a parent's legitimate prerogative or is it in some way child abuse? Discuss. (I'm not trolling; I'm seriously interested in reading different people's take on this. Please RTFA before commenting though.)
Friday, January 27, 2006
Jan 27
Wow, it's the bithday of both Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Frank Miller. Two of my faves, for different reasons.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
More Philosophical Goodness to Occupy Your Time
Besides the Molinari Society meeting described below, philosophically-inclined L&P readers may also be interested in these sessions, at the American Philosophical Association Eastern Meeting (the NY Hilton):
GIV-1. Wed, 12/28
American Association for the Philosophic Study of Society
2:00-5:00 p.m., Concourse C
Topic: A Symposium on Rasmussen and Den Uyl's Norms of Liberty
Chair: Fred Miller, Jr. (Bowling Green State University)
Speakers: Aeon J. Skoble (Bridgewater State College)
Edwin England (Denison University)
Charlotte Thomas (Mercer University)
David Thunder (University of Notre Dame)
(Rasmussen and Den Uyl will participate in the Q&A)
GIX-2. Thursday, 12/29
Ayn Rand Society
1:30-4:30 p.m. Nassau Suite B
Topic: Ayn Rand as Aristotelian
Chair: John Cooper (Princeton University)
Speakers: James Lennox (University of Pittsburgh)
"Axioms and Their Validation"
Allan Gotthelf (University of Pittsburgh)
"Concepts and Essences"
Fred Miller, Jr. (Bowling Green State University)
"Values and Happiness"
Robert Mayhew (Seton Hall University)
"Literary Esthetics"
GXI-1. Friday, 12/30
American Society for Value Inquiry
9:00-11:00 a.m. Concourse B
Topic: Author Meets Critics: Tibor Machan's Objectivity
Chair: Douglas Den Uyl (Liberty Fund Inc.)
Critics: John Reis (Elmhurst College)
Douglas Rasmussen (St. John's University)
Fred Seddon (Duquesne University)
Author: Tibor Machan (Chapman University)
GXIII-5. Friday, 12/30
North American Society for Social Philosophy
1:30-4:30 p.m., Morgan Suite
Topic: The Why of Democracy
Chair: Barbara Andrew (William Paterson University)
Speakers: Alistair MacLeod (Queen's University)
"Can We Have Freedom and Justice without Democracy?"
Jan Narveson (University of Waterloo)
"Democracy by Main Force?"
Carol Gould (George Mason University)
Title: TBA
There may be others you might find interesting. The entire program is here.
Friday, December 16, 2005
In the news...
The Senate has voted not to renew a lot of Patriot [sic] Act stuff. That's good, as far as I can tell. Short story on CNN here.
In other news, what's all this about a Cato scandal? All I've seen are oblique references, but nothing specific. Anyone know what this is about? Anyone? Bueller?
UPDATE: David helpfully provides a link in the comments, thanks. Seems to me Doug Bandow could have avoided the scandal by simply disclosing.
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Secure in their homes?
Is there some reason the Cory Maye story is getting more play at Crooked Timber than here at Liberty and Power? (Oddness compounded by the fact that the CT story links to L&P co-blogger Radley Balko's coverage of the story. Cross-post next time!) Seems to me this fellow shouldn't even be in jail, let alone executed.
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Akuta, RIP
This NYT obit for Keith Andes inexplicably omits his fantastic work on The Outer Limits and Star Trek.
Monday, November 21, 2005
Watchmen
Here's a very decent review essay in the Sunday NYT Book Review on Watchmen, by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons, which is basically the Citizen Kane of graphic novels. (What's being reviewed is a new release with extra stuff.) It's a good read. And this gives me an excuse to (a) harangue all those of you who haven't yet read Watchmen to do so, and (b) engage in the usual shameless self-promotion by posting a link to the essay I wrote on it for Superheroes and Philosophy, ed. by Tom Morris and Matt Morris (Open Court, 2005) (Somewhat sloppy scan-to-PDF -- why not go buy the book?)
Number 7!
Update RE this blogpost: The letter runs in today’s paper. Online here. That's slightly edited, but not much, and I think you'll get the idea.
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Right to Privacy: It's already there
Yesterday’s NYT ran an op-ed by a journalist, Dan Savage, which argues that we ought to have a constitutional amendment to specify a right to privacy. (Either this link or this link ought to work to read the essay.) Can you guess what I think is the main problem here? I wrote a letter to the editor. UPDATE: I was premature in my earler lament. The letter to the editor I wrote on this will in fact be published. (That'll be my 7th published NYT letter to the editor, if you're keeping score at home!) I will post another update when it runs.
Friday, October 28, 2005
Scooter Libby Gets Indicted
Not a "Little Rascals" short. Story here.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Miers is out
Today's top story isn't the ChiSox breaking their 88-year drought, although that's indeed interesting, but rather that Harriet Miers will not be joining the Supremes after all. Works for me. Any chance of Brown as replacement? (Rhetorical question)
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
"Evolution" and the 2nd Amendment
Head VC Conspirator Eugene Volokh is always a good read, but this post on the 2nd Amendment is exceptionally good. No matter how you slice it, he argues, the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right, not a state power. Go read.
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Louis Pojman, RIP
I just learned that distinguished philosopher Louis Pojman has died. He was a prolific author and editor, scrupulously fair and resepctful of contrary views, and also a genuinely decent person. I will post a full obit when one is available.
Friday, October 7, 2005
Reasonable people disagree
Interesting exchange between our co-blogger Don Boudreaux and his co-blogger Russ Roberts. Have a look.
Thursday, October 6, 2005
The sound of one hand blogging, part 2
In January, I had my right hand fixed. Yesterday, the left. The right has been symptom-free, so I'm hoping for as good a result with the left. Of course, at the moment, there's a hole in my hand. But everything is, I'm told, normal.
Tuesday, October 4, 2005
And the award for masterful geekiness goes to...
Nicholas Cage, who has named his son Kal-el. Awesome.
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Nazis...I hate those guys
Intrepid Nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal has died. Good, thorough obit here. Let me know if the link doesn't work properly.
UPDATE: much more thorough obit here.
Monday, September 19, 2005
A Textbook Case of Cluelessnes
Friday’s NYT featured an especially awful op-ed piece by law prof Ian Ayres in which he argues that it’s borderline unethical for profs to assign textbooks they have produced. I held off blogging it because I wrote letter to the editor and was waiting to see whether they’d run it, but they didn’t. Here then, for your edification, is what I submitted:
To the Editor: Ian Ayres implies that professors ordering textbooks they have written is unethical and engenders a conflict of interest (“Just What the Professor Ordered,” Op-Ed, September 16, 2005). Prof. Ayres says that by giving students who buy his book a rebate, “we will all know that I assigned the book for the right reason.” One wonders, then, why he authored a textbook in the first place. Presumably he thought he could contribute something to his students’ education by producing a textbook which was superior to others. But if this is his view, then it would be irresponsible for him not to order it. A professor’s responsibility is not to order the cheapest books available, it is to order what he or she judges to be the best ones for a given class, and that would naturally include the ones he or she has written.[end of letter - in signing, I noted both that I am a professor and that I have co-edited a textbook]
They ran someone else’s letter today which makes a similar point, but unfortunately sandwiched among several others supporting Ayres. Two other points I’d make which I was obliged to leave out of the letter for space considerations: 1, Ayres implies that he’s entitled to his profits if anyone else orders his book, so it’s not clear why he shouldn’t be entitled to them. He’s free to turn them down, of course, but his implication is that it’s wrong to profit from his own work, which is absurd. The second letter down today deals with this nicely, IMO. 2, Ayres argues that it would be a good thing if administrations had more control over a professor’s course content and text selection. Um, no.
UPDATE: Eugene Volokh weighs in; agrees with me; says it better.
UPDATE ad absurdum: Sorry Plato, you can't use Republic at the Academy - conflict of interest.
Friday, September 16, 2005
Hey, it's not like anyone has to pay for it...
Reader Dan Schmutter passes along the following item: Cindy Sheehan writing on the Huffington Post website railing against the President's handling of New Orleans. Among other things, she criticizes the treatment of looters as follows:
"The vast majority of people who were looting in New Orleans were doing so to feed their families or to get resources to get their families out of there. If I had a store with an inventory of insured belongings, and a tragedy happened, I would fling my doors open and tell everyone to take what they need: it is only stuff."
Dan notes that "the implication is that she would not give away the store, so to speak, if she had to pay for it, but if an insurance company were footing the bill, she'd be more than generous with the carrier's money." That does seem to be what she's saying. Most people are more generous with other people's money. It also struck me as less than credible that the "majority" of looting was about survival necessities. As far as I could tell, an awful lot of it was TVs and jewelry and designer sneakers. I was already negatively disposed towards Sheehan for her anti-semitic remarks, but now I see she also has no respect for private property.
Thursday, September 15, 2005
Word to the Wise
Amazing that I should scoop Chris on this, but I have to report that film director Robert Wise has died. I have come to really despise his “Star Trek: The Motion Picture,” but that’s easily forgiven when held up against all his other accomplishments, which include one of the two or three greatest science-fiction films of all time, “The Day the Earth Stood Still.” Of course, he wasn’t exclusively a sci-fi guy: He also made “West Side Story” and “The Sound of Music.” Definitely one of the greats.
Monday, September 12, 2005
Works for me!
This interesting item is odd but positive: The ethnically divided Bosnian city of Mostar has agreed to erect a new symbol of unity -- a statue of kung fu legend Bruce Lee, worshipped by Muslims, Serbs and Croats.
Thursday, September 8, 2005
Gee, couldn't have seen that coming!
They're confiscating firearms in New Orleans. I wonder how they knew which people owned them? Also irksome: the predictable exceptions (around the third paragraph).
Saturday, September 3, 2005
Tierney on Private Flood Insurance etc
Another excellent column from John Tierney in today's NYT (I think this link works without registration; if not I'll post the blog-friendly no-reg link on Tuesday). Just great stuff, esp. given where it appears.
Thursday, September 1, 2005
Street Fighting, Man
Not that I'm a huge fan of martial law, but Bush could get a two-fer by bringing large numbers of troops back from Iraq and sending them to help with the relief effort in New Orleans. Not only the physical relief and evacuation, but they'd also be well-equipped to help police the looting. I'm getting pretty tired of hearing the "desperate people in desperate times" excuse. I'll listen to that one regarding food, but not about TVs, jewelry, and sneakers. So, memo to the president: troops out of Iraq, to New Orleans.
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
A new low in shameless self-promotion...
...because it's all about me. I was listening in the car to some NPR report about Katrina, and almost drove off the road when one of them asked one of the others how well the political leaders are "dealing with" the disaster. As if being a governor were somehow like being a superhero. I wrote something on this a couple years ago for a Hoover Institute volume called Liberty and Hard Cases - the essay is Liberty, Policy, and Natural Disasters (this is a PDF), and perhaps you'll find it a propos reading. Because it's all about me.
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
AAPSS symposium at the APA
I'm still on vacation, so I'll pass on getting into some of the interesting threads that have come up since the site redesign came on. But I have some information I'd like to pass on. At this December's meeting of the American Philosophical Association, which will be in NYC, the American Association for the Philosophic Study of Society will be putting on a symposium on the forthcoming book Norms of Liberty by Doug Rasmussen and Doug Den Uyl. Below is the session info I just received from the APA.
GIV-1. American Association for the Philosophic Study of Society Wednesday, 12.28.05, 2:00-5:00 p.m., Concourse C Topic: A Symposium on Rasmussen and Den Uyl's Norms of Liberty Chair: Fred Miller, Jr. (Bowling Green State University) Speakers: Aeon Skoble (Bridgewater State College) Edwin England (Denison University) Charlotte Thomas (Mercer University) David Thunder (University of Notre Dame)
Hope to see some L&P readers or bloggers there!
Friday, August 5, 2005
Stephen Davies
I don't know whether it's the HNN server or my dial-up access that's preventing me from using the comments function, but something is, so I'll just have to add my hearty welcome to Steve Davies as a regular entry. I'm delighted to share blogspace with Steve, who, as David notes, is amazingly knowledgable (and is quite the raconteur I might add). Welcome aboard Steve!
Saturday, July 30, 2005
More summer reading
The other thing I read earlier this summer, before I started the Gaiman kick, was The Man Without a Hobby, which is the memoirs of the influential philosopher Tibor Machan. It's a fascinating story -- smuggled out of communist Hungary as a teenager, complete with the canonical crossing-the-barbed-wire-at-midnight, coming to America, joining the Air Force, working his way through college and grad school, fighting the odds to complete his PhD, dealing with failed relationships, the development of his ideas, and so on. (I was tickled to see myself quoted, albeit anonymously, regarding an observation I once made about Tibor's work habits.) One caveat: unfortunately, the book is marred by many typos - the publisher really owes Tibor an apology, IMO. But don't let that stop you from reading it - it's a truly interesting story of a very important figure in contemporary libertarian thought. Caveat #2: the link above is to Amazon, because I'm a creature of habit, but you may do better ordering it from B&N or directly from the publisher. (LFB is already sold out.)
Friday, July 29, 2005
Summer reading
Just finished Neil Gaiman's American Gods a moment ago -- terrific novel, hard to describe, but I definitely recommend it. I've started working through the Sandman material also. (Roderick, I'm assuming you've already read Gaiman - I'd be interested in your take, either in comments or via email.) Next, meaning tomorrow, I tackle Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle. I'm guessing I won't get any further than the end of Quicksilver before the fall semester begins, but it's a start.
Hmm - Steve Horwitz must be on vacation: I would have expected him to blog a happy birthday greeting to Geddy Lee - not to worry Steve, I'm on it. ;-)
New entry on L&P blogroll
To your right is another addition to the L&P blogroll, Diana Mertz Hsieh's "NoodleFood." She's very sharp, go check her out (link is under "d" not "n").
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
Tierney on free-market environmentalism
John Tierney has another good column up on free-market environmentalism. Tierney is a really great addition to the otherwise commie-oriented NYT op-ed roster. UPDATE: link fixed, no registration required.
Saturday, July 9, 2005
Welcome to the Blogroll
Alert readers will have noticed an addition to the L&P blogroll: Lynne Kiesling's Knowledge Problem. According to her bio, "Lynne Kiesling is a senior lecturer in economics at Northwestern University. Her research focuses on regulation and technological change, and other issues in regulation and privatization. Dr. Kiesling also serves as director of the Applied Energy Research Program at the Interdisciplinary Center for Economic Science, home of Vernon Smith, the 2002 Nobel Prize winner in Economics. The Applied Energy Research Program seeks to expand the use of experimental economic research in the establishment and implementation of regulatory policy, particularly electricity policy, at both the state and federal levels." In addition, let me add, having just spent a week teaching with her at an IHS summer seminar, that she's a terrific teacher and a supercool person. Readers are invited to check out her blog.
I should also mention that the other economist I worked with this past week, Frank Stephenson, who is also terrific, is already on our blogroll! He blogs on the group blog Division of Labour.
The other faculty I worked with (Elizabeth Hull and Mike Allen) were great, but don't seem to have blogs. You'll just have to read them in print!
Wednesday, July 6, 2005
RIP, stoic style
Admiral James Stockdale has died. As far as I know, he was the only Stoic philosopher to run for Vice-President of the United States. I was not even remotely interested in Perot's campaign, but Stockdale was pretty cool.
Monday, July 4, 2005
Rights
I'm teaching this week at an IHS summer seminar, and one of the other faculty, economist Lynne Kiesling, liveblogged one of my talks. I'm geeky enough to think that's way cool! It's July 4th, so I tied my talk on rights to some Lockean/Declaration-of-Independence themes. Happy Independence Day to all L&P readers!
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
Reason Papers archive now on-line
I am proud and pleased to announce that Reason Papers has a new website, the chief virtue of which is the full-text PDF archives. Reason Papers was founded in 1974 by Tibor Machan, and I took over editorship in 2000. All of issues 1-25 are now available for download or on-line reading in the “Archive” section of the new website. Issues 26 and 27, the most current, are available for purchase, although one or two pieces from those as well have on-line PDFs if you want a sample. When issue 28 is published this Fall, issue 26 will go on-line, and so on (what they call a “2-issue moving wall”). This is a truly exciting event, as some of the older back issues were out of print, and the history of Reason Papers includes many noteworthy contributions by major theorists from philosophy, economics, history, and politics. I am especially grateful to Stephan Kinsella for doing the tedious work of making the PDFs, David Veksler for the site redesign, and Jeff Tucker of the Mises Institute (and the Mises Institute generally!) for volunteering to host the site. Thanks! I encourage everyone to go have a look at the new site, and I hope you find much of value in the archives.
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Justice as Fairness
Something like that: Freestar Media is working on using Kelo to take Souter's home. Works for me.
Monday, June 27, 2005
Kelo as teaching opportunity
To follow up on Radley Balko's post below, it occurs to me that we have a good teaching opportunity here. Normally, the left dismisses those of us who think property rights are important as being tools of the rich and powerful, as if only the rich and powerful benefit from a robust conception of property rights. We've been telling them for years, of course, that a regime of strong protection of property rights benefits everyone, especially the non-rich and non-powerful, but maybe now they'll believe us.
TTFN
It’s not quite the level of amazing coincidence attained by John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, who both died the same day, which furthermore was the 50th anniversary of July 4th, but this comes pretty close: Piglet and Tigger both died over the past weekend, a day apart. [sniff!] I’m referring of course to the voice actors who gave them life in the original trilogy of Disney shorts. John Fiedler is also noteworthy for having played one of the jurors in Sidney Lumet’s brilliant 12 Angry Men, and the avatar of Jack the Ripper in “Wolf in the Fold,” an episode of Star Trek. Paul Winchell did a ton of VO work – go look. (If those NYT links don’t work, the CNN links are here and here.) Anyway, RIP Piglet and Tigger!
Thursday, June 23, 2005
First Raich, now This (Kelo)
More bad news: there's no such thing as private property, according to the Supremes.
UPDATE: This NYT editorial is nonsense. After noting the objections made O'Connor's dissent, the NYT tells her to relax, there's nothing to worry about. Oh great, the Times is sure no abuses will result from this, that makes me feel so much better. Then to add insult to injury, the editorial concludes that hey, it's not really a big deal anyway, because the "few small property owners" will be "fully compensated." Nice of the Times to make explicit its view that these people are small, but as to their being fully compensated, um, no. They didn't want to sell in the first place, so does the compensation package include their anguish and inconvenience, as well as a true market value for their homes (as opposed to 5-year old government appraisals)? Didn't think so. Not to be rude, but this seems analogous to raping someone, calculating the going rate for a prostitute, giving the victim that amount of money, and then claiming she was justly compensated. Sorry for going blue, but the more I think about this the madder I get, and it doesn't help that the left praises this ruling because, as the NYT puts it, "it's a setback to the 'property rights' movement." Note the scare quotes! Commies.
Friday, June 17, 2005
Stephenson Speaks
If Neal Stephenson wrote an op-ed in the NYT about anything, I'd probably blog it, but he in fact wrote one about Star Wars and geekery, and some of the political/cultural implications he has observed. Interesting analysis for anyone who follows broad cultural trends, and of course mandatory reading for Star Wars geeks or Stephenson geeks.
Thursday, June 16, 2005
I Forgot My Mantra
David Brooks makes a good observation in today’s NYT about the change in mainstream middle-class culture, but misses an opportunity for thorough diagnosis. He notes that, in the 50s and into the early 60s, “There was still a sense that culture is good for your character, and that a respectable person should spend time absorbing the best that has been thought and said.” The popular newsweeklies “were pitched at middle-class people across the country who aspired to have the same sorts of conversations as the New York and Boston elite.” Brooks offers two reasons why “serious culture matters less now than it did then, and artists and intellectuals have less authority”: one is that in the 60s, many intellectuals, resentful perhaps, or threatened, criticized the mainstreaming of culture – he cites as an example Clement Greenberg, who “called the middlebrow an "insidious" force that was "devaluing the precious, infecting the healthy, corrupting the honest and stultifying the wise."” In addition to the assault from the highbrow, Brooks says, the popular culture itself changed: “Readers felt less of a need to go outside themselves to absorb works of art as a means of self-improvement. They were more interested in exploring and being true to the precious flower of their own individual selves.” Brooks here misses an opportunity to explore this more fully. Why would this have become the case? Part of the explanation, I think, has to do with the rise of relativism. The old idea of self-improvement as character development presupposes some objective standard by which the development can be assessed. If virtue and good and right are all meaningless or relativized concepts, then self-improvement would merely be a matter of self-exploration – hence est, situation ethics, communes, coke-laced disco sex orgies, all the usual suspects of 70s narcissism. Another part of the explanation as to why artists and intellectuals have less authority today is that they abdicated. (I say “they” because I was in grade school at the time.) When the paintings and sculptures were all abstracts or “conceptual” pieces, when the music was atonal and disharmonious, when the literature was inaccessible to the mainstream reader, that’s when artists lost their authority. Brooks was prompted to write today’s op-ed by finding a Time Magazine from 1961 with Hemingway on the cover. While Hemingway is commonly taught by lit teachers both in high school and college, and people get PhDs studying Hemingway, it’s also the case that anyone can read Hemingway and enjoy it. Pretty much all of what is now classified as great literature was once also popular: from Sophocles to Shakespeare to Jane Austen to Hemingway. Now the highbrows sneer at “airport novels” or “genre fiction,” while the virtually-redundant category “literary fiction” has become the home for highbrow stuff that the middle class doesn’t read – is it because they’re too stupid now, or is it because the “serious” authors write inaccessibly? And so also with the intellectuals: the version of relativism that took hold in the mainstream was a trickle-down from the academy. I used to fume about how this decadent society refused to pay any attention to philosophers. It still irks me, but I have come to realize that part of the blame for that lies with the philosophers themselves, who have made philosophy irrelevant by embracing first linguistic analysis (exclusively – there’s nothing wrong with it per se, what’s wrong is the sort of Vienna-Circle move that says that ethics is all hooey because it can’t be expressed with quantifiers, which probably isn’t even true anyway) and later postmodernism. It’s not about getting it all right – it’s about posing questions people care about. But “relevance” has to be combined with seriousness for the inquiry to be effective. The first wave of “popular culture studies” was derided for treating pop ephemera as if it were a cache of brilliant medieval texts to be “decoded” or deconstructed, and was written by the elite for the elite. The new wave in popular culture philosophy, which I’m proud to have been part of from day 1, is about using the popular culture to motivate old-school highbrow reflection in the mainstream audience. Even today, too many philosophers are ceding to Tony Robbins and Phil McGraw territory that we can work more effectively, just as the literati are making themselves irrelevant by dumping on Beethoven and Shakespeare and praising abstraction and obfuscation. The academy needs to return to its senses, then I suspect the mainstream might also. I’d be really interested in a productive comments thread here, so fire away.
Wednesday, June 8, 2005
Dean perpetuates idiotic oversimplification
Honestly, Dean is a pot calling the kettle black.
Philosophy and Democracy
The BBC’s website has an interesting example of the sort of contest one isn’t as likely to find in the US – vote for your favorite philosopher (hat tip: CT). They’ve already narrowed it down, so nominees are set, but if the final 20, I’m sure you’ll find one to be worth voting for (and of course, the final 20 does in fact include the 3 or 4 best, so you certainly can vote for the best one if you like, though democracy being what it is, there’s no guarantee that the best will win). But go vote anyway, for fun. It’s an interesting website, if nothing else – the nominees have celebrity endorsements. Speaking of philosophy, the NYT reports that President Bush was a B+ philosophy student at Yale. (FWIW, Kerry was a B+ student in poli sci – and they had a cum-gpa of C.)
Monday, June 6, 2005
Ok, fine, so there's no limit to federal power after all
Bad news for liberty: the Supremes have made their decision in Ashcroft v. Raich, and the ruling is that there are no limits to federal power as long as you mention the phrase "commerce clause." Since the attorney for the good guys was VC blogger and BU Law Prof. Randy Barnett, anyone who is interested in this ought to go to Volokh several times today.
UPDATE: dissenting Justice Thomas sums it up pretty well thus: "If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything -- and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers." His dissent is here, and Solum has links to everything as well as good analysis.
Wednesday, June 1, 2005
Deep Throat identified
This is all over MSM sources as well as the blogosphere, but worth blogging nevertheless: top FBI guy Mark Felt was Woodward and Bernstein's "Deep Throat" source during their Watergate investigation. It's very admirable that they kept their word to protect his anonymity all these years. He was played by Hal Holbrook in the 1976 film of their book "All the President's Men," which, BTW, ought to be required viewing for all lovers of the First Amendment.
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Embarrassing
Via Will Wilkinson, another books meme: “What 5 books are you vaguely embarrassed to admit you haven’t read?” Ok, I’ll bite:
1. Tolstoy, War and Peace
2. Tocqueville, Democracy in America
3. Cervantes, Don Quixote
4. Plato, Cratylus
5. Milton, Paradise Lost
I’m sure if I thought about it, I could come up with dozens.
Monday, May 23, 2005
Dec. 05 meeting of AAPSS at the APA
Following up on Roderick's announcement of the 2005 meeting of the Molinari Society, I'm pleased to announce the program for the 2005 meeting of the American Association for the Philosophical Study of Society, which, like the Molinari Society, meets in conjunction with the Eastern Division meeting of the American Philosophical Association. The APA this year will be Dec. 27-30 in my old hometown of NYC. (The AAPSS session hasn't been assigned a time slot yet; I'll post it when we have been.) This year, the AAPSS meeting will be a symposium exploring the new book by Douglas Rasmussen and Douglas Den Uyl, Norms of Liberty: A Perfectionist Basis for Non-Perfectionist Politics. The session will be moderated by Prof. Fred D. Miller, Jr., of Bowling Green State Univ. and the Social Philosophy and Policy Center. Symposiasts will be Edwin England of Denison University, Charlotte Thomas of Mercer University, David Thunder of Notre Dame University, and yours truly. (For those of you keeping score, that's 3 philosophers and one political scientist (Thunder).) The authors will be in attendance and may respond to papers or take questions from audience members. This promises to be a lively symposium on a fascinating book, so I hope some L&P readers (and co-bloggers!) can make it.
Monday, May 16, 2005
A priori knowledge
Can we know things a priori? Well, I'm reasonably certain this is false:
A.O. Scott (NYT) on Star Wars Episode III: "It's better than Star Wars." I'm sure I'll go see it, fanboy that I am, and maybe it'll even be good, but I cannot imagine it'll be as good as Scott makes it out to be. Of course, the NYT is legendarily obtuse about sci-fi (including space-operas that technically aren't sci-fi).
Friday, May 13, 2005
Get Well Soon wishes...
...for Bill Bradford, editor of Liberty Magazine. According to a note on our L&O co-blogger Wendy McElroy's other blog, Bradford is in the hospital, in ICU. Hope he's well soon.
Wednesday, May 11, 2005
12 books, 12 articles
Ok, here’s a bloggy thing to do: transmit a meme. Over at his other blog, our L&P co-blogger Don Boudreaux lists 12 books that really influenced him. (He also gives us a separate list of 12 articles.) So if I understand this stuff correctly, the proper blog procedure is for me now to do this also, and wait for a fun comments thread or for other L&Pers to do the same. < nicholson voice> Yes, I’m certain I read that somewhere, that must be the right thing to do < /nicholson >. This list won’t be in order of influentiality, or anything else, and I reserve the right to change the list if someone reminds me of some obvious thing that I’m forgetting.
1. Plato, Republic – highly influential in its presentation of justice as objective, reality as separate from perception, why philosophy is worth doing, and what inner harmony means. Widely misinterpreted as a utopian political treatise, the “ideal city” described herein is actually an analogy to the well-balanced psyche, and Plato’s account of how unjust regimes arise in books 8-9 is remarkably astute. No Plato, no philosophy major.
2. Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics – virtue ethics beats deontology and utilitarianism hands down. No Aristotle, no grad school. 1177a10-22, dude!
3. Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia – obvious, perhaps, but this would be where I first read convincing rebuttals of both socialism and welfare-liberalism.
4. Tibor Machan, Individuals and Their Rights – very strong case for an individualist ethic and a libertarian political model derived from it.
5. Douglas Rasmussen and Douglas Den Uyl, Liberty and Nature – the argument with which I’m most sympathetic, showing how a neo-Aristotelian ethic can underlie a classical-liberal rights theory. (Their forthcoming book promises to be an even better approach to this theme.)
6. Jonathan Jacobs, Being True to the World – very convincing defense of a naturalist moral realism, and how practical reason can be action guiding.
7. Steve Ditko, Static – I didn’t know whether fiction should be included here, but I really have to include this, because the chain of causality is interesting and relevant. I had never read any Rand, but I read and loved Static. When I discovered that its themes were “objectivist,” that’s when I started to pay attention to Rand’s novels, which I found very rewarding, enjoyable, and thought-provoking (and under-rated). (Static seems to be out of print – that’s a crime.)
8. David Schmidtz, The Limits of Government – why the free-rider problem is much less of a worry than it’s said to be.
9. Robert Axelrod, The Evolution of Cooperation – one reason not to take Hobbesian arguments seriously.
10. Harold Berman, Law and Revolution – important history of law. What Don said.
11. F. A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty. Coercion and why it’s bad. Don’s pick, Law, Legislation, and Liberty, is better and I now refer to it much more frequently, but I wouldn’t have found that without having first read this.
12. Edith Hamilton, Mythology – this is surely the root of my interest in ancient Greek thought. Chain of causality again – Hamilton leads to Homer, Aeschylus, Thucydides.
13 (Don made it a bakers’ dozen, so I get to as well). Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars – very important influence on the development of my thinking on this issue.
The anarcho-influences which might seem to be lacking above turn out to be found in the “12 articles” section:
1. Randy Barnett, “Pursuing Justice in a Free Society, parts 1, 2” Criminal Justice Ethics Fall 85, Winter 86
2. Murray Rothbard, “Society Without a State,” Nomos XIX 1978
3. Terry Anderson and P.J. Hill, “An American Experiment in Anarcho-Capitalism,” Journal of Libertarian Studies III 1, 1979
4. John Hasnas, “The Myth of the Rule of Law,” Wisconsin Law Review, 1995
The other articles include:
5. Douglas Rasmussen, “Essentialism, Values, and Rights” (in The Libertarian Reader, Machan ed., 1982)
6. Stephen Holmes, “The Community Trap” TNR Nov 28 1988
7. Hayek, “The Errors of Constructivism” (don’t have the citation handy)
8. Leonard Read, “I, Pencil”
9. Mill, “On Liberty” (if Don can call “I, Pencil” a book, then I can call “On Liberty” an article – Mill calls it an essay!)
10. Douglas Den Uyl, “Freedom and Virtue” (in Machan 1982 supra, via Reason Papers 5, 1979)
11. Herbert Morris, “Persons and Punishment” (Monist, 52:4, 1968)
12. Douglas Den Uyl and Douglas Rasmussen, "Nozick on the Randian Argument," The Personalist 1978 (I found it in Jeff Paul's excellent anthology Reading Nozick.)
13. A. N. Prior’s Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry “Traditional Logic”
Ok, your turn. Yes, you.
Friday, May 6, 2005
Terrific Analysis of a Matter of Great Concern...
...to geeks, at least. Todd Seavey's very insightful analysis of how the fannishly-oriented deal with continuity problems is spot-on. Indeed, I was going to write something like this, and now don't have to.
Thursday, May 5, 2005
Journalistic Ethics
Is it just me, or there something unethical with this sort of story? (I don't want to repeat the headline or topic - otherwise I'd be guilty of just what I'm complaining about.) CNN gets wind of an allegation, pumps out a story with a headline that loudly and unequivocally announces the allegation as fact, buries parenthetically at the bottom what is virtually proof that the allegation is false. So, if you're the sort who reads the whole thing, and are good at ignoring headlines in favor of substantive analysis, you won't be misled, but most people will be. That seems to me to be unethical. NB-I'm not saying this just because it's Frank, this is a practice I've seen them, and others, do before.
Monday, May 2, 2005
May Day
Everyone needs to read Catallarchy today -- the May 1st entry, should you be reading this later on. A proper commemoration for May Day.
Friday, April 29, 2005
Barbarians
According to this Norwegian news story, Munch's "The Scream" has been destoyed. That's not good.
Know what this is? Guess I didn't.
This NYT story is interesting in lots of ways, but what struck me the most was the revelation that that famous photo of the helicopter evacuating people from the embassy roof in Saigon is actually something else. Have a look!
In other news, my promotion to Associate is now official. Woo-hoo!
Thursday, April 28, 2005
Huffington group blog
Reader Dan Schmutter passes along this preview of the Arianna Huffington group blog. I'm guessing this is satire, but who knows.
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Tierney on a roll
John Tierney keeps up the good work, with this excellent column comparing the Chilean approach to social-security reform to that of the US.
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Tierney on science and neo-puritanism
I was delighted to learn a couple weeks ago that John Tierney would become the new NY Times op-ed columnist. Today's column is a great example. I apologize for using the reg-required link; I can't do the magic blog-friendly linking trick from my home computer. On Monday, I'll update this blog entry to include the non-reg link, but NYT reg is free, and many readers may already be registered, so go read this.
UPDATE - as promised, here is the blog-friendly no-reg link.
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
More on Pope Benedict
I'm not a Catholic, so my interest in this stuff is academic in both senses of the word, but I feel like I ought to blog on it anyway.
While I think he's mistaken about gays, I think this is a good message: "One of Cardinal Ratzinger's central, and most misunderstood, notions is his conception of liberty, and he is very jealous in thinking deeply about it, pointing often to Tocqueville. He is a strong foe of socialism, statism and authoritarianism, but he also worries that democracy, despite its great promise, is exceedingly vulnerable to the tyranny of the majority, to "the new soft despotism" of the all-mothering state, and to the common belief that liberty means doing whatever you please. Following Lord Acton and James Madison, Cardinal Ratzinger has written of the need of humans to practice self-government over their passions in private life. He also fears that Europe, especially, is abandoning the search for objective truth and sliding into pure subjectivism. That is how the Nazis arose, he believes, and the Leninists. When all opinions are considered subjective, no moral ground remains for protesting against lies and injustices." (That's from a NYT op-ed by Michael Novak, read the whole thing here.)
All of that is true.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Pope Benedict, FYI
Here's the scoop: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger is the new pope, narrowly edging out my friend Lou, who did toss his hat in the ring, though perhaps too late for anyone to notice.
Minuses: anti-gay-rights
Pluses: likes Beethoven
BTW, when did the MSM stop using the "John Cardinal Doe" arrangement in favor of the "Cardinal John Doe" arrangement?
Thursday, April 14, 2005
Problems with Democracy
Ok, who exactly are these people voting for Scott Savol? Talentless, inarticulate, and a wife-beater. Please.
Ok, I've just "outed" myself as a viewer of this show. But hey, it speaks to various problems in philosophy, so I can get away with it. Besides, I'm not the only one! But I won't "out" any of the others. They'll have to make that decision for themselves.
New Neighbors
He's too modest to have mentioned it here, but one of our regular commenters, and all-around good guy Irfan Khawaja has started a blog of his own, eleswhere in the HNN quadrant of the blogosphere. It's called Theory & Practice, and it's blogrolled under "HNN Blogs," top right of this page. Check him out! He's a very sharp philosopher, and a good writer, so I for one am looking forward to his contributions, and the corresponding decline in my own productivity.
Wednesday, April 6, 2005
Value Pluralism
Yes, ok, but this nevertheless strikes me as wrong.
Barnett speech at BSC
VC blogger and law prof Randy Barnett came down here to BSC to give a talk yesterday on “Medical Cannabis, The Commerce Clause & Arguing in the Supreme Court.” Barnett, of course, was lead counsel in Ashcroft v. Raich, which is ostensibly about medical marijuana, but which is really about whether there can be any limits to federal power under the commerce clause. (He is also one of the most important libertarian legal theorists – if you haven’t read The Structure of Liberty yet, you should.) I’m pleased, and not at all surprised, to report that his talk went very well – exciting and engaging, and also very helpful in terms of enhancing undergrads’ understanding of both the legal issues involved in this case and constitutional argumentation generally. (Not just the undergrads, either – I learned something about those as well.)
Tuesday, April 5, 2005
Divide and Conquer?
David Brooks makes an interesting point in his NYT column today. He argues that dissent and division within conservatism is actually a healthy thing, because (among other reasons) it requires them to pay attention to the philosophical underpinnings of the different wings (e.g., neocon vs theocrat, free-market vs trad-values, etc.). It occurs to me that this is also applicable within libertarianism. Brooks notes that (modern) liberalism doesn't really have any philosophical parentage. I'm not sure whether this is true - Rawlsians might argue that Rawls is the philosophical underpinning of welfare-state liberalism, but OTOH the existence of the liberal-democratic welfare state predates A Theory of Justice. But in any event, it's clearly true that libertarianism, both in its minimal-state and anarchist varieties, does have a rich philosophical heritage, which, according to Brooks, ought to be able to help us in the battle of ideas.
Monday, March 28, 2005
This just in...
Like a good pagan egoist, I made a much bigger deal out of yesterday being my birthday than I did about the resurrection. Anyway, Easter is supposed to come _after_ Passover.
Friday, March 18, 2005
Making a Federal Case
Why exactly is steroid use in Major League Baseball a matter for the United States Congress? Part of me wants to say that this is a good thing, because the more time they devote to this, the less time they have to do more pernicious things. But really, how is this a Federal Issue?
Tuesday, March 8, 2005
Coffee Talk
Lileks speculates of Starbucks and Caribou coffee that “the reason people adulterate the stuff with flavors and whipped cream and milk is simply to hide the brackish taste of the original product.” But surely it’s the other way around – they make it ultra-strong and bitter because people are not drinking it straight, but rather using it as an ingredient in their Caramel Macchiatos and Mocha Lattes and Frappucinos. I’m as much a coffee snob as the next guy, but I need coffee that tastes good by itself. Your best bet: D’Amico’s, on Court Street in Brooklyn. (I mention it because you can now order on line, so it doesn’t matter if you don’t live near Court Street). Decades before it was trendy, this place was importing raw beans, and roasting them on the premises. This is a couple blocks from where I grew up, so I have memories from childhood of the wonderful aroma of that great copper roasting machine. You can’t smell anything on a web site, but the coffee is still the best. (They also have terrific Italian meats and cheeses, BTW.)
Thursday, March 3, 2005
Spider-Man Bible Stories
This is too weird not to share: Spider-Man Bible Tales
Hat tip: Diana Hsieh
Wednesday, February 23, 2005
Wilkinson gives Chait the what-for
I cannot recommend highly enough this excellent rebuttal by Will Wilkinson to Jonathan Chait's recent TNR piece. I've been a TNR subscriber for 20 years - essays like this really are unworthy. Glad Wilkinson is on patrol.
Is the LP bad for libertarianism?
Over at Volokh, Randy Barnett makes a good point, I think, arguing that one major effect of the Libertarian Party has been to reduce the political influence of libertarians. His rationale for saying this is pretty straightforward, have a look.
Friday, February 18, 2005
Blasphemers!
This sacrilege against a revered pantheon seems to me to be unspeakably stupid.
Wednesday, February 16, 2005
Gratuitous Insults
I'm afraid my reply to Kinsella here will get buried, so I'm linking to it here. I don't know what I did to deserve such insults, but I'm not about to let it slip without reply. I had heretofore been on good terms with Kinsella, so this comes out of left field. Or perhaps he'd care to retract them.
UPDATE: Stephan semi-apologizes, and I semi-accept, here, and below in comments.
UPDATE: Stephan apologizes, and I accept.
Monday, February 14, 2005
By Hook or by Crook, We Will
Reader Dan Schmutter notes this ominous development: a Rover prototype.
Wednesday, February 9, 2005
FIRE has a blog
This is likely to be of some interest: the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has a blog.
Thursday, February 3, 2005
Privacy and Pizza
This ACLU ad is very clever. Funny/scary. Here's the link: ACLU Pizza Ad
Hat tip: Dr. Terry Maratos-Flier
NYT Hatchet Job on Rand Centennial
Here's the blogpost I tried to have up earlier:
On the one hand, it’s nice to see the NY Times paying some attention to the Rand centennial – on page 1 of the Arts section today – but on the other hand, this coverage is marred by annoying (if predictable) misrepresentations. Edward Rothstein writes “Did Rand really believe that the world should be run by such creators while second-handers (ordinary workers like most of us) humbly deferred?” Of course, that’s an amazing distortion of Rand: she argues neither that creators should “run the world” nor that “ordinary workers like most of us” are second-handers. This is a caricature of Rand’s view, the distortion that all the lefties despise her for. He goes on to explain that her acolytes were conservatives, never mind that she didn’t consider herself conservative and disliked conservatism. Other nonsense fills the essay, but the ultimate in nonsense comes at the end, where Rothstein writes: “these men [Roark and Galt] find their ideals only in isolated rejection of democratic society, as cardboard reincarnations of the Romantic hero. Perhaps Rand really believed democracy was hopeless and wanted a government ruled by such men. Perhaps she never really cared about working any of this out. Or perhaps, in the end, she really didn't know what she wanted.” Come on! It’s not as if she never wrote anything about a regime of individual liberty, minimal-state capitalism, rule of law, or personal responsibility. Utter misrepresentation. David Boaz has a much better piece here, but sadly, many more people read the NY Times than visit Cato’s web site (or L&P).
Update: the irony is that this sort of distortion is one of the phenomena she satirizes in her novels. Why take a challenging idea seriously when you can sneer or scoff?
Wednesday, February 2, 2005
Gremlins
Hmm. Looks like the earlier malfunction in the HNN computer has been fixed, but when the problem vanished, it took some posts with it. I had posted an entry in which I give the NYT's Edward Rothstein the what-for for his hatchet job on Rand. I can repost it in the morning, I guess.
Meanwhile, the President is giving the state of the union address, which I gave up watching several presidents ago. If he can pull off privatizing social security, that'll be great, but my guess is that the speech will irritate me. If he actually believed in an "ownership society," that would be great too, but my suspicion is that that's just a stance he adopts when useful, one which he's just as quick to abandon in other contexts. Well, we'll see what's what in the morning.
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Liberty, Policy, and Natural Disasters
It occurs to me that my NPR appearance gives me a chance to plug the piece I wrote on those themes for a 2002 Hoover Press volume, edited by Tibor Machan, entitled Liberty and Hard Cases. My essay, Liberty, Policy, and Natural Disasters, is on-line, as is the rest of the volume.
Monday, January 24, 2005
Update for my stalkers
I'll be on NPR's "Talk of the Nation" this afternoon about 3:30.
Sunday, January 23, 2005
Sad news from LA
I regret to inform you that Johnny Carson has died, at 79 of emphysema. Late-night TV hasn't been the same since he retired in '92. He had pretty much been out of the public eye since then, but his passing bears note.
In lieu of flowers for his wife, you can send some to mine -- I still have a large hole in my right hand, so it falls to her to snowblow the THREE FREAKIN' FEET of snow covering our driveway. (OTOH, at least we have a snowblower.)
Thursday, January 13, 2005
What is the sound of one hand blogging?
Ans: very slow, typo-ridden blogposts. Carpal tunnel surgery yesterday went fine, according to my ortho surgeon. (Thanks, BTW, to those of you who sent good wishes.) For anatomy geeks, what they do is cut away part of the flexor retinaculum, which was impinging the median nerve inside the carpal tunnel. If you google it, I bet you can find pix.
Rt hand relatively immobilized for a few days, so I'll be lurking more than posting, but we'll see...
Sunday, January 9, 2005
Speaking of Gods...
Today is Jimmy Page's birthday. 61!
Hmm, I see there's lots of heated discussion I need to catch up on below. That'll keep til Monday. Right now I'm going to celebrate the aforementioned holiday by putting on that new live 3-CD set....
Friday, January 7, 2005
Will Eisner, RIP
Will Eisner has died. As the story notes, he was a very important and influential comic artist, creator of The Spirit.
Sunday, January 2, 2005
AAR for APA
Like Roderick, I was pleased with the pro-liberty turnout at the recent APA. There were meetings of at least four groups specifically oriented towards an individualist/pro-liberty position, and at least one session not so oriented but nevertheless featuring a libertarian speaker. (Roderick's post below has the link to the program, so I can be lazy and not link to it myself.)
Things I learned include: 1. When giving comments on a paper, even if the main speaker says he wants to give an extemporaneous talk, that doesn't mean I can give extemporaneous comments. I was less articulate than I had hoped, although others reported that they did get the distinction I was trying to make (between a natural-law type, end-state-driven notion of social evolution and a neo-Aristotelian natural-end-driven notion) and its relation to the main speaker's remarks on Hayek. My bad.
2. I can't do a great job on 2 hours sleep.
3. Jacob Levy is as cool in person as he is on-line. He attended both the Molinari meeting and the AAPSS meeting, and made good contributions to Q&A in both cases, plus I had the chance to chat with him informally a couple times.
4. The newly formed Molinari Society is off to a very promising start.
5. Medieval logic is much more powerful than it is typically given credit for. It can, e.g., answer DeMorgan's Challenge. (I'll discuss this further if anyone is even remotely interested.)
6. Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash, while not quite the masterpiece that Cryptonomicon is, is terrific.
Although I'm "back" from the APA, I'm still on break doing family things, but I'll resume regular blogging later this week. BTW, thanks again to Roderick for charing the AAPSS session. Happy new year to all our readers.
Monday, December 20, 2004
Impending Semester Break
Once the grading marathon is over, it'll be time to focus on holiday/family business, so lighter blogging over the next couple weeks is to be expected, from me at any rate.
However, philosophy-inclined readers of this blog who live in the Boston area might be interested in 4 or 5 sessions at the APA meeting Dec 27-30, which will feature L&P bloggers Roderick Long and myself, plus such familiar names as John Hasnas, Jan Narveson, and Doug Rasmussen (and if those names aren't familiar to you, they should be). The APA program is on-line somewhere - I know the proper bloggy thing to do would be to post the link, but I have to get back to the aforementioned grading post haste. (An easy google search should do it, I think.)
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
What is Social Security "For"?
Over at Volokh Conspiracy, Todd Zywicki has a terrific post analyzing bad arguments against social security reform. A good read for anyone interested in this issue, and also good fodder for logic class.
Monday, December 13, 2004
News from Academia
This just in: The Journal of Libertarian Studies now has a better-qualified Editor-in-Chief than does its slightly-older cousin Reason Papers. Fortunately, we all recognize that competition is a good thing!
Friday, December 10, 2004
Obits for David Brudnoy
Tibor Machan has a very nice eulogy for the late David Brudnoy here.
Journalism Ethics
This strikes me as deliberately dishonest: ABC’s web site offers the headline “Famous Atheist Now Believes in God” for a story about philosopher Antony Flew. But if you read the story, it’s clear and unambiguous that he doesn’t believe in the deity that the headline seems to refer to. (He seems to have a religion similar to that of our co-blogger Roderick Long.)
Thursday, December 2, 2004
TV Christmas Specials
This satire of TV Christmas Specialsis very funny, and well-thought-out too. Have a look.
(Hat tip to Crooked Timber)
I Have a Gub
I guess I don't quite understand what this antigun program was supposed to be about. Are armed robberies committed with illegally-obtained guns somehow worse than armed robberies committed with legally obtained guns? Do they require a separate (federal) program? I wouldn't have thought that state and local law-enforcement agencies needed special federal programs to investigate robberies and homicides. This smells like more of a bureaucracy program than a public-safety program, and it's not clear, certainly not from this news story, why we should be upset that it's now unfunded.
Utterly Shameless on My Part, and Late Too
Yesterday was Woody Allen's birthday, so I guess I missed a good opportunity to plug my latest book.
Let Him Through, He's a Scientist!
While the subject matter isn't at all amusing, the headline on this obit did induce a chuckle, temporarily transporting me to the world of a 1950s sci-fi film.
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Cabinet Shuffle
Lileks makes two very insightful, yet amazingly economical, observations today. The first, regarding the reports that Condi Rice is likely to become the Secretary of State: “I want her to go to Saudi Arabia, and I want her first words upon getting off the plane to be ‘I’ll drive.’” Yes. At some point, these medievals need to brought into the 21st century, or at least the 20th. Then he says: “As for the Department of Education, I’d like to see an experiment: let the position go unfilled for four years and see if it has any impact on the educational abilities of the nation’s youth.” I was wondering the same thing myself.
Friday, November 12, 2004
Jonah Goldberg on Arafat
I often find reason to disagree with NRO's Jonah Goldberg, but in this blogpost on Arafat, he's making an excellent point.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
Diversity in Higher Ed
Great essay in the Chronicle of Higher Ed on intellectual diversity in academia.
Quagmire Exit Strategy
Here's a speech the president isn't likely to give, but should.
I would now like to address the Iraqi people, and I’ll be very brief. We’re leaving. Tomorrow morning, all US troops will be withdrawing from Iraq. Before you start firing guns in the air, which NRA safety guidelines discourage, take a moment to contemplate your situation. Until very recently, you were subjects of one the worst tyrannies in recent history. Now you are not. I had hoped you would embrace your freedom and institute a pluralistic, democratic republic, but I see that you have been slow to embrace this. It’s also started to seem like you actually resent our presence here, so we’re going to leave. I implore you, though, don’t throw away the opportunity. We got rid of Saddam for you, but only you can make a free society. In a couple more days, the only people here with guns will be you. What will you do with them? Will you use them to kill those of a different faith or tribe? Or will you put them away, reserving them for defensive purposes, and set about the business of figuring out how to live together? If you need advice about how to set up a constitutional regime, we stand ready to advise you – via email. If you want to attract businesses and investors, you’ll have to create your own peace and stability. If you’re going to take hostages and cut off heads, you’ll find no one wants to open an office here. So, please, take a day off in thoughtful contemplation – we call tomorrow “Veterans Day”; you can do the same if you like – and the day after that, we’ll be gone, and you’ll be on your own. The choice will then be yours – build a free, stable, and peaceful society, or commence a bloody civil war. We’ve removed the tyrant, the rest is up to you. We’ll be going now. Goodbye, and good luck. Call if you need anything.
Ashcroft Resigns
Guess I get the "scoop" on Ashcroft's resignation -- a fringe benefit of getting up at 5:30. Of course, I got up early so I could extra work done, and here I am blogging, but I have to say it doesn't break my heart to see Ashcroft leave.
AG UPDATE: It's Gonzales, according to the AP.
Wednesday, November 3, 2004
This Just In...
Kerry has conceded.
Friday, October 22, 2004
Say Hello to My Little Friend
Good news for proponents of the right to defend oneself: a New Jersey grand jury refused to indict a man who shot a killed a thief. Works for me.
Hat tip Fark
Thursday, October 21, 2004
Enjoy Scenic Leavenworth
The ranking soldier at Abu Ghraib got an 8-year prison sentence, plus forfeiture of pay, a dishonorable discharge and a reduction in rank to private. Works for me.
Why I should continue to link to news stories from CNN is beyond me. They have refused to correct their false claims about the electoral college for days now. Nevertheless, I think this sentencing story is accurate.
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
Who's your heavenly father?
Even though the outcome was not to my liking, it must be conceded that Curt Schilling turned in some quality work last night. But what was especially infuriating was his attributing his performance to divine intervention. "Tonight God did something amazing for me. I just prayed for the opportunity to go out there and compete, and he did it for me." Oh, I see: God doesn't intervene prevent genocides, because of the whole free will thing, but he will intervene in baseball games. Please. I was all set to praise Schilling's determination, strength of character, mental toughness, and so on, but apparently it wasn't about that.
Friday, October 15, 2004
Third-Party Electoral Votes
According to CNN, "The last third-party candidate to receive an Electoral College vote was George Wallace in 1968." Is this true? I thought Hospers received one electoral vote in 1972, but maybe I'm wrong. Anyone know?
UPDATE: Reader Gil Guillory pointed me towards this evidence that I was right and CNN got it wrong. Hospers did indeed get an electoral vote in '72. For bonus points, can anyone get CNN to correct their web site?
Business Ethics
According to this article, Steve McQueen will be the next celebrity to endorse some Ford models, including the Mustang. While the underlying idea of “so-and-so likes it, so I should buy it too” is abysmally bad reasoning, as a good capitalist, I normally don’t object to celebrity product endorsements. Bad logic is the responsibility of the thinker. Celebrity product endorsements are ethically objectionable, though, if there is deliberate dishonesty, e.g., if the pitchman doesn’t even really use the product. Or -- if the pitchman is dead! Steve McQueen doesn’t make a choice here to endorse the product at all. This is worse than a deceptive ad campaign, this is a non-consensual ad campaign. Inasmuch as it appeals to McQueen’s star power as a selling point, it’s both deceptive and non-consensual. Similarly, the idea that Laurence Olivier is “co-starring” in Sky Captain is appalling.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Shameless Plugging
Reason Papers vol. 27 is back from the printer. Those of you who contributed or who pre-paid will be receiving it in the next couple of days. The rest of you: click on the link above or here to see what's in vol. 27. Ordering info is here.
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Michael Moore goes to Middle-Earth
This hilarious short film spoof "Fellowship 9/11" is well worth the 12 minutes or so. (Via Fark)
Saturday, October 9, 2004
Why is a mouse when it spins?
Derrida has died, whatever that means.
Not to speak ill of the dead, but his influence in the Academy has been quite pernicious, so don't look for any eulogizing. I'm simply passing along the information.
(Sorry if that's not an accessible link, I can only do the magic linking trick from my office.)
Friday, October 8, 2004
The things that pass for knowledge, I can't understand
Philosopher Jack Weinstein has written what I think is an extremely insightful essay on academic values, anti-intellectualism, and higher ed structure. It appears in the current issue of Thought and Action, which, fortunately for you, is available on-line. This important essay is here.
I can’t resist noting that I explored some of these themes here, but Jack’s essay is certainly more comprehensive.
Just so we're clear on this
Kerry: "The president and I have the same position, fundamentally, on gay marriage. We do. Same position."
Wednesday, October 6, 2004
Looks good on you, though
Rodney Dangerfield has died. As the obit mentions, he was a “one-liner comic of the old school,” so his comedic gifts were sometimes lost on younger audiences, although his performance in the legendary Caddyshack offset this to a large degree. What is often overlooked is his eye for new talent. He gave important spotlight opportunities to Robert Schimmel, Andrew Dice Clay, Carole Leifer, Bill Hicks, Dom Irrera, Lenny Clarke, Barry Sobel, Bill Maher, Sam Kinison, Jerry Seinfeld.
Monday, October 4, 2004
The Final Frontier?
Reader Daniel Schmutter wrote in to point out the significance of this early entry in non-governmental space flight. As government programs go, I've always been more at peace with the space program than, say, agriculture subsidies or social "security." But really, this too should be privatized, and the argument that space exploration cannot possibly be accomplished by the private sector was definitely dealt a blow over the last few days. Nice going!
Friday, October 1, 2004
Bernie comes through again
Am I actually ahead of Chris in posting this very good sports news??
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Ok, one more thing
I'd be interested in some intra-L&P discussion of something timely. Although he self-identifies as an anarchist, L&P blogger Roderick Long seems to support the idea of voting for Badnarik, thus by extension voting generally (Correct me if I'm wrong, Roderick, but your personal blog features an as urging people to do this). On the other hand, fellow L&P blogger Wendy McElroy has written that anarcho-libertarians should not vote at all -- I recall an essay you wrote in Liberty a couple years ago in which you argued eloquently that even voting against Hitler would be participating in something wrong, and again, correct me if I'm wrong, that means you and Roderick disagree on this issue. Is it a moral disagreement? A tactical one? Both? I voted for Ron Paul in 88, then shortly thereafter was persuaded by Wendy's writings to stop voting, but lately I've been wondering about this. I'd like to hear from other L&P bloggers about this, especially but not limited to Roderick and Wendy.
Ok, that's four this morning
This story says a lot about the art-critic establishment, and about abstract painting generally. If I can be Lileks for a moment, my four-year-old is all about mimetic art, thanks very much.
Socrates would vomit
Several of my colleagues are trying to promote political awareness by encouraging students to watch the upcoming presidential "debates." Just so we're all clear on this, there actually won't be any debates between the presidential candidates. They will be taking turns delivering mini-speeches they've prepared in response to questions they know they'll be asked. They will not actually "discuss with" or "debate" each other at all. Neither will ask the other a single question. Calling this a debate ought to violate truth-in-advertising laws. Why the media is complicit in this debasement of political discourse is beyond me. Wait, no it isn't.
Stop the madness!
Come on people, take a stand for a change. This will never be the case in my classroom.
Cultural Relativism 1, Justice 0
Stories like this never fail to make angry - and my anger at the perpetrators is almost matched by my anger at their academic enablers, in my office and in yours.
By the way, this is my first attempt at the linking method Chris recommended I use for NYT stories. If it doesn't work, someone let me know.
UPDATE: Some have questioned my assertion about "academic enablers." Here's an example.
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
More on Lucas' self-abuse
Today's (Tues) Lileks (first half of essay) is very good on Star Wars.
Monday, September 20, 2004
Not just for law students!
Via the Volokh Conspiracy, this excellent discussion of hypotheticals from Lawrence Solum's legal theory blog strikes me as something of value for philosophy students as well as law students.
Friday, September 17, 2004
The Decline of a Filmmaker
This essay on the decline of George Lucas is excellent.
Thursday, September 16, 2004
Ivan from on high
Yikes! If it looks scary from up here, I'd hate to be inside. Good luck, Roderick! (Hat tip to Lileks for the pic)
Hu are you kidding?
I complained last week about the two-party system, but I guess it's better than a one party system. No joke - read the piece (NYT registration required, but free).
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
Departure noted
Jacob Levy is taking a leave of absence from blogging. Our loss, but his reasons are perfectly sensible.
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
Sovereignty again
Carlin Romano has a great essay on sovereignty in the free section of the Chronicle of Higher Ed. (My previous blog entry on that was here.)
Monday, September 13, 2004
Long reply to critics on war issues
Ok, several responses to my Friday post have come in over the weekend, so I’ll make several replies together here. John Shaffer writes in the comments: What about the Arab proverb, "Better 100 years of tyranny than one night of anarchy." Surely that proverb refers to chaos, not anarcho-capitalism, but even in that case, it’s not clear that 100 years, or even 10 years, of secret police torture and mass graves is better than a night of looting. “Maybe they don't value freedom above all else, whether we think they should or whether we think they're entitled to it.” If there are any such things as human rights, all humans are entitled to them, whether or nor they have countervailing cultural or religious traditions. In general, too, the line that human rights is just a western prejudice is more likely the refrain of abusers, not victims. “The country is in utter chaos now and it's hard to see how it gets any better from here.” It gets better when the US establishes indigenous security and policing, withdraws the bulk of its troops, and lets them experience how good life is when you have autonomy and a freedom bounded only by the constraint of respect for the rights of others. (Hmm, I wish we had that here!) “A system of freedom cannot just be imposed by a colonial occupier.” Sure it can: ask the Germans and Japanese. The trick, of course, is to disarm the forces of the tyrant(s), then “impose” the system of freedom, and then leave.
Chris writes in the comments: “because of all the internal contradictions of this system, we are obliged to be very careful in the kinds of actions we advocate. Yes, of course, ‘[t]he general population in Iraq and in Germany ... are just as entitled to freedom as we are.’ But how freedom comes to these general populations is a profoundly important strategic question. There are enormous differences between the current context of Iraq and the historical context of post-war Japan and Germany, both of which were utterly destroyed by total war, but which still retained a uniform culture, with some democratic antecedents.” I’m sure that’s true, and I agree that we need to be, as Chris puts it, careful, and also that the administration is not doing a bang-up job of doing so. To defend libertarian hawkishness is not to defend the current administration.
My colleague from downstairs emailed, in response to my claim that tyrannies have no right to exist:
“A regime which is rights-abusive loses some of its legitimacy, but it hardly is black-and-white. My government does many things that
Both my colleague downstairs and Wilkinson disagree with my claim that anyone may prosecute justice. In certain contexts, e.g., within a stable and legitimate society, we might say that we have delegated any purported natural right to prosecute justice to the agents of the state who are so charged. But even then, a duty to rescue may override. If I am witnessing Smith assault Jones, should my response be “well, it’s the job of the police to help out here, and since I have delegated my natural right to intervene to the state as part of joining civil society, I cannot help Jones”? Surely not. And on the global scale, the analogy holds even less well, since the US and Iraq aren’t both parts of a larger society (and if we say that the UN represents some analogue to civil society, we note also that Iraq was in violation of many UN-mandated conditions which enable the cease-fire from the previous war), so the idea that the power to interfere has been delegated away doesn’t apply anyway.
My colleague asks a series of slippery-slope questions: “But what if my neighbor were flushing unwanted pets down his toilet, could I shoot him then? What if he was striking his child, but not in a way likely to permanently injure said child? What if in the firefight I accidentally killed someone else in the house in the process of taking out the illegitimate, rights-abusive neighbor? What if he really did kill somebody in his house, but it was years ago, I was there at the time, was a friend of his, didn’t say anything about it then, but years later decided to shoot him? Any of these scenarios might fit the Iraqi situation as well as the one you consider.” I hardly think the mass graves and torture squads are analogous to flushing a pet down the toilet. Some of the other entries on this list are thought-provoking, but don’t, just by being asked, constitute a refutation of the principle. If Smith is assaulting Jones, Jones has the right to defend himself, and Smith has no right to assault Jones, so everyone has the right to help Jones defend himself. This doesn’t imply, however, that everyone has the obligation to help – it may be imprudent or unfeasible. That’s why this: “Considerations of natural rights might incline you to the view that the US would therefore be morally justified in invading, say, China, and I might agree, in the brief moment before deciding that your helpfulness in crafting a decent real world foreign policy was at an end” isn’t quite right – since China has intercontinental missiles with nuclear warheads, it wouldn’t be prudent to invade China. That doesn’t mean their regime has a right to exist which we’d be violating if we did invade. I am not in favor of invading China, but not because the regime there doesn’t deserve to be toppled.
Was it necessary to invade Iraq? Probably not necessary. Was it prudent? Not sure. It depends on how the administration wraps things up. If the conclusion is a relatively free and peaceful Iraq, that’ll be great. If they make a total botch job of it, and the theocrats take over, then it will have been imprudent. “In Iraq we have become part of the injustice we came to solve, and it was utterly predictable that that would be so.” It need not have been so. I agree though, that they’re handling this badly.
Will Wilkinson writes on his blog that I’m wrong about the anyone-can-seek-justice thing because of the quantifiers. “If a regime like Iraq is illegitimate, then, perhaps, there is someone or other that is justified in overthrowing the illegitimate regime. But it doesn't follow that that somebody is us, or even any state.” That’s correct. That’s the point I made earlier, in reverse. To claim that the war is imprudent, or that we had no obligation to free the Iraqis, doesn’t mean that it wasn’t permissible. Wilkinson concedes that “Iraq, or the Baathist regime, would not be wronged if we invaded” but then says “But that doesn't entail that we, or anyone else in particular, may invade.” It does entail that we may invade. It doesn’t entail that we must invade. It’s true that “The state may be obligated to forebear for other reasons, namely, that the war is not in the interest of its citizens, and the actions of the state can only be justified in reference to the interests of its citizens.” If a freer and more peaceful Iraq has a stabilizing influence on the region, and represents an alternative to Islamism, it will be. “The citizens who pay the taxes are wronged, even if the Baathists aren't.” I already agreed to that, but qualified by observing that we’re not any more wronged by that wealth-transfer than by any other, and liberating a nation from a tyrant is, if anything, more justifiable than, say, steel tariffs. “For me, the whole argument comes down to this nuts and bolts empirical squabble: was Iraq a threat? The answer, as far as I can see is ‘No.’” I don’t know. Irfan did a nice job documenting some of this over the summer. In any case, I’ve been trying to say something about libertarianism and hawkishness generally, not necessarily about this war in particular. Do the anti-war libertarians, as a matter of principle, think it was immoral for the colonists to go to war against the British? That was consistent, I’d argue, with Lockean approaches to libertarianism.
With all due respect to your headline-writing skills, David, Max Borders doesn’t represent “the” libertarian hawk position. First of all, there probably isn’t just one, and second of all, Borders isn’t IMO making the clearest case. What’s that, Chris, you want me to elaborate? Ok.
I wasn’t entirely satisfied with the Borders piece, but neither was I satisfied with the Will Wilkinson piece David just mentioned, plus one of my colleagues here at BSC was on this subject today, so I guess I’ll have to reply to everyone all at once.
I’ve been known to express hawkish sentiments from time to time, but I would dissent from Borders’ analysis. My main disagreement with Borders is the insistence that rights are contractarian fictions, which is established partly by contrasting social-contract theory with a straw-man version of natural rights: “We get rights by virtue of some sort of social contract, not from our Creator….’rights’ as such, are not some Cartesian substance that animates the body in the manner of a soul.” Well, sure, if “natural rights” means that, I guess contractarianism looks pretty good. But this analysis ignores another approach to natural rights, the neo-Aristotelian. On that view, the “natural” in “natural rights” refers to human nature, the requirements of a human life and the necessary conditions of human flourishing. However, perhaps the argument for hawkishness doesn’t hinge on which strategy one employs to derive a theory of rights.
I’d also be a lot more comfortable if Borders would not be so fond of the definite article. Libertarian hawks aren’t one single thing with a monolithic view. “The libertarian hawk takes her cues from Hobbes, not Locke” Huh? I don’t. America’s most famous libertarian hawk, Thomas Jefferson, didn’t either. Jefferson’s arguments in the Declaration of Independence, and in his essay on“the Necessity of Taking Up Arms”, are wholly within the Lockean perspective. My long essay on this will appear in December or January, along with Roderick’s contrary piece, from the symposium I mentioned above, but the short version might go something like this: We have rights prior to any political structures. Political structures maintain power through force, which much be justified by consent. Consent can only be legitimately given if the power-structure which is being consented to protects rights. A regime which is rights-abusive has no legitimacy, which means that its use of force to protect itself is also illegitimate. That means that it may be overthrown, by force if necessary. That was the rationale for the use of force by the colonists against Great Britain, and that might also serve as a rationale for overthrowing any dictatorship. Wilkinson’s main objection (and this seems to be the view of some of my co-bloggers) seems to be that American taxpayers shouldn’t have to pony up the cash to pick up the tab for overthrowing someone else’s dictator. Well, that’s true – but then, from a radical libertarian perspective, American taxpayers shouldn’t have to pony up the cash to pick up the tab for anything if they don’t want to. Saying the overthrow of Saddam wasn’t obligatory doesn’t mean it was unjustified. (Deontic logic, people!) An act may be permissible but nonobligatory. A subcategory within that group is the supererogatory. Maybe the Iraq war was one of these. It didn’t violate the rights of American taxpayers any more than anything else they spend our money on. It certainly didn’t violate the rights of the Baathist regime there. Ditto terrorists: Wilkinson writes “the fact that there are terrorists, murderers, and illegitimate regimes out there who have forfeited some or all of their moral standing does not begin to imply that the United States of America may swoop in and see that justice is done.” Sure it does – anyone may. Whether it’s mandatory, or prudent, are separate questions. But libertarians who prefer the “letters of marque” approach need Wilkinson to be wrong here just as much as the Pentagon does.
My colleague here criticizes Borders for implying that “the new White Man’s Burden is to coax (with pre-emptive tough love where appropriate) those outside our charmed circle of civilization and contractual liberties into sharing our worldview.” But who’s being the neocolonialist here? A human rights view must by definition be a universalist view. If there’s any such thing as natural rights/human rights, then Iraqis have them too, which means they are just as entitled as the American colonists to be rid of a tyrant and to institute small-d, small-r democratic republics. One difference between the American colonists and the Iraqis under Saddam, though, was the whole extensive terror/secret police/disarmed populace/mass graves/poison gas thing, which King George hadn’t thought of. Under those conditions, it’s plausible that they might need help to be rid of the tyrant (as, to be honest, so did we).
My colleague further expresses skepticism about libertarian hawkishness on the grounds that it’s “freedom for me but not for thee.” But it doesn’t have to be that way. Were the Japanese more free in 1938, or in 1948? The Germans? It’s “freedom for me but not for thee” with respect to Baathists and Nazis, just like it’s “freedom for me but not for thee” for any criminal. The general population in Iraq and in Germany, though, are just as entitled to freedom as we are.
Is the current administration entirely committed to maximizing individual liberty? No. Is it actively subversive of liberty via the Patriot Act? Yes. Is it predominantly interested in maintaining and expanding its own power (as would be the opposition, if elected)? Yes. But it doesn’t follow from any of that that everything it does is illegitimate, broken clocks and all that.
Now let’s see whether this comments thread can break the record set by the sci-fi thread.
This piece in the Chronicle is well worth a read, and I'm betting you'd do well to forward it to several of your colleagues. Both the NYT and IMDB report that George Lucas' seminal sci-fi film THX 1138 is going to be rereleased to theaters on Friday, and "will be released on DVD on Sept. 14 in a digitally buffed and polished ‘director's cut.’ The new version, five minutes longer than the original release, includes several computer-generated enhancements (like a far more elaborate factory where THX works)." I'm all in favor of "director's cut" rereleases, especially when external pressures forced cuts or changes in a film that the director didn't want. But the digital technology that allows for revisions of the film has led to pernicious results. Most egregious is Lucas’ revisions of his original Star Wars: in addition to the gratuitous added FX, he altered the scene where Han shoots Greedo to “sanitize” the character. Another example is Spielberg’s PC removal of guns from ET. This rewriting of history is straight out of Orwell, but doesn’t even have the grace to be motivated by world conquest – it’s the destruction of their own art works for extra cash. I’ll concede, at least arguendo, that they have the right to change their films, but this destruction is an aesthetic wrong, and betrays a lack of integrity on the part of the filmmaker. Perhaps this highly competitive activity should be considered for the Beijing Olympics. They're apparantly quite serious. Note that the link is not to The Onion. According to the news reports today, Bush says "In all of these proposals, we seek to provide not just a government program, but a path -- a path to greater opportunity, more freedom, and more control over your own life.” (I didn’t watch, I chose to spend the hour more productively, viz., drinking very old Port.) That sounds great! More freedom and more autonomy for the individual – why that’s just what I favor too! But really, is there any evidence that this is what we can expect? According to CNN, Bush “spoke of revamping Social Security to allow younger workers to set up "personal" accounts -- a proposal Democrats have criticized as opening the door toward privatization.” This single sentence encapsulates so much of my disillusionment with the two-party system: the Republicans talk about privatizing social security in half-measures, and then don’t do it anyway; and the Democrats criticize them for even talking about the half-measures! So neither party actually has any intention of letting me invest my own money for retirement. Those half-measures Bush mentioned last night were the same ones he mentioned four years ago, of course, and yet the system remains totally unchanged. My best guess is that, four years from now, it will still remain totally unchanged, regardless of who wins in November.
Why do they even have conventions, a friend of mine wrote to ask the other day. I said that they used to be for actual deliberation, and now it’s just a junket. (Just out of curiosity, do any of the historians here know when was the last time a nomination was sufficiently contested as to make the convention meaningful?).
So let’s see: neither Bush nor Kerry favors same-sex marriage, neither of them will make any steps whatsoever towards social-security reform nor significantly reform the tax code, neither will end ag or tobacco subsidies, both are trade protectionists, and they both favored the invasion of Iraq and the “Patriot Act.” Tell me again why it’s so important to vote?
It's getting lost at the bottom of the page, but people are still going at it in the comments threads, so I thought I'd re-link to it here. Because the Newspaper of Record thinks this bozo is the leading intellectual theorist of anarchism. According to a “group of international scientists,” the following are the top ten science-fiction films:
1. Blade Runner
2. 2001: A Space Odyssey 3. Star Wars+ The Empire Strikes Back 4. Alien 5. Solaris (1972 version) 6. The Terminator+T2:Judgement Day 7. The Day The Earth Stood Still 8. War of the Worlds 9. The Matrix 10. CE3K
I guess the group of scientists didn’t include any mathematicians, since that’s 12, not 10. But this list is seriously flawed in more significant ways. (I will not comment at all on #5, since I confess I’ve never seen that one –the others I’ve all seen multiple times.)
First of all, can we please stop using the expression “science fiction” as a synonym for “has laser battles in space”? I was under the impression that, as a genre-defining term, science fiction was that branch of literature (and by extension films) which dealt with the effects of science or technology on the human condition, or which explores the human condition via science. I’m willing to interpret that pretty generously and include looks at future societies and so on. But much as I loved the original Star Wars, that’s clearly not science fiction – it’s a fantasy film with an interplanetary setting. Ok, that’s one. Next, as to the low position of The Day the Earth Stood Still: if you’re going to tell me that The Empire Strikes Back is better science fiction than Day, I’m going to have to ask you to step outside. Day (with hardly any laser battles, or FX of any kind) has so much more to say about people, society, the ethical ramifications of technology, etc. than most FX blockbusters that it really ought to rank higher. War of the Worlds, on the other hand, which I like very much, really doesn’t. (The screenplay bears almost no resemblance to Wells’ novel, which does.) It’s got many virtues, including the 50s Hollywood “scientists,” but as far as talking about anything serious via science/technology? No [Spoilers follow]: the Martians come, we can’t do anything about it, they virtually annihilate us, but they get sick from our microbes and all die, ergo God is great for creating microbes. That’s it?? Please. Here are some candidates the scientists probably ought to have included instead:
Forbidden Planet
Frankenstein (1931 version mostly, but I won’t quibble)
Things to Come (1936)
3 or 4 episodes of “The Outer Limits”, esp. Expanding Human, Demon with a Glass Hand, Soldier, The Inheritors, maybe one or two more.
I’m sure there are other great films which are slipping my mind this moment, but the main point here is that there are at least a half-dozen better selections than 4 or 5 of the scientists’ top-10.
By the way, I realize that I probably have violated some blogger ettiqute by not making hyperlinks to every title mentioned above. But look, you can go to IMDB as easily as I can.
How on Earth did it take forty years to figure out that this fellow was railroaded? Interesting article from the free section of The Chronicle of Higher Ed. In addition the main point the author is making, also interesting is the entirely predictable and smug reaction from another academic. Interesting trendspotting piece in the NYT about teachers using blogs as a way to facilitate exchanges with and among students. One notable observation is that blogging, unlike course-management web software developed specifically for classroom use, is easier to use. That’s interesting, and there’s a lesson there about software development, I’m sure. But the question is, is this effective pedagogy, or just riding a wave? According to the article, “One of the goals of classroom blogs, advocates say, is to get students to write more often.” Ok, so far so good, easy enough to measure that. On the other hand, “Critics also worry that the casual nature of writing on the Web may encourage bad habits that are hard to break, like e-mail-style abbreviations, bad grammar and poor spelling.” (What profiteth a teacher should he or she get students to write more, but more poorly?) The predictable response to this: “While some teachers who run blogs encourage students to write out their entries on paper first and then post them online as if they were publishing the work, others view blog writing as more free-flowing. "Blogging is a different form of writing," Mrs. Dudiak said. "They should proofread, but we are more concerned about the content, not grammar."” The great composer Elmer Bernstein has died. Thought I'd mention it before Chris did. Call me insensitive, but this seems to me just plain silly. Timothy Noah has a piece at Slate taking Dairy Queen to task for insensitive product naming - he claims they made a colossal blunder naming their coffee+ice-cream+crushed-ice drink the "MooLatte" because that "sounds like" "mulatto," and that's offensive. Part of the reason he claims it's offensive is that the drink is light-brown. Of course, it's only light brown if you order the Mocha - the French Vanilla and Cappucino are different colors. So let me see if I get this: not only are there offensive words we ought to avoid, but sensitivity also requires us to avoid words that sound like offensive words? Please. (BTW, I've had their Mocha MooLatte. It's a silly name, but a very tasty concoction, if you've got a caffeine jones and a sweet tooth.) Watching the opening cermonies at the Athens Olympics, I just knew someone would mention the "legend" which underlies the marathon - the Athenian army beat the Persians, and this one dude ran back to Athens to share the good news, and promptly dropped dead of a heart attack - and then hint that it's probably just a cool story. When I was reading up on the Greco-Persian Wars a couple years back, I discovered that the truth is actually more interesting: The "marathon myth" is wrong for a different reason. According to "The Greco-Persian Wars" by Peter Green (an eminent classicist), what happened was this (I'm summarizing; this is from pp. 35-40): I certainly appreciate the kind introduction by Chris, and the invitation from him and David to join L&P as a regular member. As I said when I guest-blogged earlier this summer, I consider myself to be in august company. Friday, September 10, 2004
Not Borders, nor Wilkinson, nor pacifists
Wednesday, September 8, 2004
Truth Value
Rights versus Integrity
Tuesday, September 7, 2004
True Competition
Friday, September 3, 2004
Rats on the West Side, Bedbugs Uptown
Monday, August 30, 2004
Sci-fi thread still going strong
(I just added $0.02 about anti-semitism.)Sunday, August 29, 2004
Why anarcho-capitalists need to change labels
Friday, August 27, 2004
Let Him Through, He's A Scientist!
Friday, August 20, 2004
Travesty of Justice
Thursday, August 19, 2004
Aristotle and Boxing
Blogs for Classes
Ah, the “different form of writing” line. Holy Ebonics Debate, Batman! But note the false dichotomy there – content not grammar. If the grammar is bad, the content is obscured. Good writing needs to be good in more than one sense. As George Orwell noted long ago, sloppy writing breeds sloppy thinking, and vice versa.
But that’s not an objection to any particular medium in which the writing takes place. I’m sure one can also use classblogs to encourage and develop more careful writing and thinking. Bottom line: "If it gets kids excited about learning," [Assistant Principal] Mrs. Contner said, "we might as well try it."
Goodbye to a Great
Wednesday, August 18, 2004
Tempest in a Waffle Cone
Friday, August 13, 2004
Truth better than myth
After the Athenian forces defeated the Persian land force, the rest of the Persian fleet sailed around with the intent of attacking Athens. The entire Athenian army then hightailed it back to Athens, beating the Persian fleet by an hour or so. The sight of this made the Persians retreat, and made pro-Persian Athenians unwilling to betray their city. The Pheippides story does indeed seem to be myth, but there's an apparently true story which is actually even better. BTW, they ran 24 miles, not 26 - the discrepancy has to do with whether you measure from the modern-day town of Marathona versus the ancient battle site. Still pretty cool though.
Why does the false legend have such persistence when the truth is so much better?Thursday, August 12, 2004
Philosopher Acquires New Procrastination Device
It’s interesting that this blog is hosted by “History News Network,” yet as far as I can tell, at least 10 of the L&P bloggers are non-historians. Including me: I’m a philosophy professor. (While we’re doing numbers, six of the other bloggers are people I’ve met personally (ten counting the contributing editors list), four are people I’ve corresponded with or spoken to on the phone, but never F2F, and the rest I’ve never met, but in most cases have read their work somewhere other than L&P.) As Chris implies, I’m from NYC, but now I live in Massachusetts, teaching at Bridgewater State. I do political philosophy, moral philosophy, phil of law, and then there’s the popular culture writings. So, I’ll mostly be blogging on those areas, but might occasionally have something to say about other fields, if I know anything about them.
Couple confusing things – 1, my first name is pronounced as “Ian.” 2, tenure and promotion are separate here, so while I’ve just been granted tenure, I won’t be promoted to associate til the spring (assuming I get promoted, of course).
During most of vacation, I had no internet access (the horror!), and I see to my great dismay that I missed some fascinating threads on libertarianism and foreign policy/war both here and at Volokh. Curses! It would be overly obsessive to go back over the archives of the last 6 weeks and chime in late, so I won’t. But next time! While I was disconnected, though, I finally had a chance to read Neal Stephenson’s Cryptonomicon, and it’s as good as I had heard.
Anyway, happy to be here. Next, I attempt to do some work.
Recent Entries
- Launching a Left/Right Coalition Against Empire
- Excellent EconTalk Podcast
- Dr. Pangloss: Patron Saint of the United States
- Icelanders against the State
- Excellent Short Discussion of the Crisis
- Quotation of the Week (On Treason)
- Is the Current Recovery a Piñata with No Candy Inside?
- Left Goes Postal on Rand
- My Review Of "Complicit"
- Stemming the Tide of History
News
Roundup
HNN Blogs
- Cliopatria
- Liberty & Power
- Judith Apter Klinghoffer
- How Stupid?
- Mark A. LeVine
- Allan Lichtman
- Tim Furnish
- Gil Troy
Wikipedia
Contributing Editors
- Common Sense
- Stephen Cox
- Stephen Davies
- Grinder and Hagel
- Gus DiZerega
- Gene Healy
- Karen U. Kwiatkowski
- William Marina
- James Otteson
- Jim Powell
In Memoriam
Freedom and Standards on Campus
- Grade Inflation
- Foundation for Individual Rights in Education
- National Association of Scholars
- Acton Institute
- Atlas Economic Research Foundation
- Cato Institute
- Foundation for Economic Education
- Independent Institute
- Institute for Humane Studies
- International Center on Nonviolent Conflict
- Liberty Fund
- OnPower.org
- Pope Center
- Trebach Institute
Blogs & Columns
- The Adam Smith Institute
- Agoraphilia
- Alan Bock
- Alina Stefanescu
- A Tiny Revolution
- Antiwar.com Blog
- Austrian Economists
- Beacon
- Booker Rising
- Cafe Hayek
- Chris Sciabarra
- Colby Cosh
- Cold Spring Shops
- Colossus of Rhodey
- Crooked Timber
- David N. Mayer
- Diana Mertz Hsieh
- Discriminations
- Distributed Republic
- Division of Labor
- Econlog
- Education Wonks
- Gene Healy
- Gus diZerega
- Hit and Run
- James Bovard
- Jacob Levy
- Jesse Walker
- Jim Henley
- John Cole
- Journal of Ayn Rand Studies
- Juan Cole
- JustinLogan.com
- Karen De Coster
- Kevin Carson
- Knowledge Problem
- Lester Hunt
- LRC Blog
- Liberty and Culture
- Liberty Guys
- Liberty Magazine
- Liberty Papers
- Margaret Soltan
- Mises Economics Blog
- Peter Gordon
- Positive Liberty
- Progressive Historians
- Radley Balko
- Robert A. George
- Roderick Long
- SCSUScholars
- Sheldon Richman
- Stress
- Third Party Watch
- Tom G. Palmer
- Torch
- United Liberty
- Volokh Conspiracy
- War Historian
- Wendy McElroy
- Will Wilkinson
Old Archives
Recent Comments
- William J. Stepp on Excellent EconTalk Podcast
- William J. Stepp on Excellent EconTalk Podcast
- Bill Courtney on Left Goes Postal on Rand
- William J. Stepp on Quotation of the Week (On Treason)
- Sheldon Richman on Anatomy of the Current Recession
- Ayla Armbruster on OJ Simpson and Climate Change
- Jane S. Shaw on OJ Simpson and Climate Change
- Jane S. Shaw on OJ Simpson and Climate Change
- David T. Beito on OJ Simpson and Climate Change
- Allan Walstad on OJ Simpson and Climate Change
Archives
March 2010February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
