RoR: Forum

As a postscript, just after I sent out this column I was informed that Fox has cancelled Judge Napolitano's Freedomwatch program on Fox Network. No idea what the reason is--the news release I read at Reason.com gave no specifics about whether there were enough viewers, advertisers, whatever. Maybe the program was a casualty of Murdoch's efforts to atone for his malpractice in the UK, maybe it is just preparation for another four years under Obama, I have no clue. (These days White House retaliation cannot be dismissed as out of the question!)

Post 1

Sunday, February 12, 2012 - 5:16pm

Mr. Machan,

Just when I was feeling optimistic, you post the remark about the cancellation.

Yes, that is worrisome, and is there hint of conspiracy in your last sentence of post 1?

It is a shame that many Republicans, who present themselves as defenders of liberty, are, in fact, a threat to it.

Perhaps this has something to do with the definition of freedom. The Republican (or Democrat) definition of freedom are at odds with freedom, whether this is intentional is another issue. Are they simply guilty of ignorance or is it malevolence? But some people get right to the point by explicitly opposing freedom.

I just re-watched Chris Matthews (when interviewing Ron Paul) claim that "total freedom doesn't work". As to what he means by total freedom, I think the answer is given in the next issue discussed, the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. He criticized Paul for opposing the portion of the law which forced business owners to serve people whom they didn't wish to serve, in this case, Blacks.

Ron Paul didn't shy away from this criticism, and implied racism. He also got straight to the point by explaining that property rights apply to owners of the businesses (despite their beliefs) and that no one has a right to the services of a business.

This is the kind of honesty, as displayed by Matthews and Paul, that is needed when speaking of freedom.

When you mentioned Paul Krugman claim (and your reaction to it), it reminded me of my own reaction to such claims. I wonder if such a claim will be repeated when this country is in complete economic ruin. I also wonder who will believe it then. Probably only Krugman, if he even believes it now.

Krugman's claim is a classic case of labeling the cure as the poison.

Anyway, it is a fine article, at first I thought it might hold a pessimistic view (due to the title), but I was pleasantly surprised.

(Edited by Kyle Jacob Biodrowski on 2/12, 6:17pm)

Post 2

Monday, February 13, 2012 - 9:41am

In the Books forum is a discussion of The Rational Optimist by Matt Ridley. It would be a mistake to look at the French Revolution and Napoleon and ignore James Watt and Matthew Boulton. Whether things are "getting better" or not is pretty much a matter of local perception: you see your own life best. As political ideologues with very specific definitions, we tend to measure life in general against standards that may be irrelevant. As I pointed out in the other thread, the govenrment of California is financially weak, but Silicon Valley endures.

In touting Hong Kong, John Stossel pointed out that it benefited from benign neglect. There was no explicit philosophy of freedom, no intellectuals of liberty, no manifestos or unknown ideals. And yet there it is.

I have written here on RoR before about Cairo 1600 where merchants made more than money: they physically remade the town. And a slave woman could bring suit at a court of law. What European city of that time could offer the same liberty?

The thing with trade and commerce is that they move. They move goods and services and the institutions go where they are wanted. It may happen that in America, we relax the regulations that prevent growth and opportunity. We may not. Perhaps when Aung San Suu Kyi is president of Myanmar life will greatly improve there.

"Green Days in Brunei" is an easy cyberpunk science fiction story. Nothing moves faster than science fiction except reality.

Post 3

Wednesday, February 15, 2012 - 6:33am

I am not all that well versed in conspiracy theories. I am not sure who is conspiring and what is the goal of the conspirators and I am also a bit puzzled by how people manage to know so much about such things when supposedly they are carried out in secret. I agree with the rest of your comments.

Post 4

Wednesday, February 15, 2012 - 6:47am