Showing posts with label Libertarians. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Libertarians. Show all posts

Friday, May 6, 2022

Ending Roe Threatens Abortion Rights

Remember, if you're libertarian (and I'm not), you're for abortion rights. 

Elizabeth Nolan Brown, at Reason, is hear to remind you, "Ending Roe Threatens More Than Abortion Rights":

In discourse about Roe v. Wade being overturned and states severely restricting or limiting abortions, much of the discussion is (rightly) focused on the potential fallout for those with unwanted or unsustainable pregnancies. It's girls and women of childbearing age on whom such prohibitions would fall the hardest, or at least the most directly. But banning abortion would bring many second-order effects that merit consideration, too. Some children, families, and medical professionals may suffer grave consequences. We're also likely to see a drastically expanded state. Today I want to devote a little attention to some of these often-overlooked consequences...
Keep reading.

 


Thursday, May 3, 2018

The Redistribution of Sex

All this stuff about "incels" is freaky and rather disgusting, frankly.

But considering there's a major push to legalize prostitution on the left (it's "sex work," don't you know?), it does seem rather inevitable that "progressive" social policies designed to satisfy a "right to sex" will emerge. Such a right is a bullshit, of course, but I've already seen idiot libertarians like Will Wilkinson making the argument that incels should get cash vouchers to help them afford women of the night, or something.

It's too weird. In any case, see Ross Douthat's column at NYT, FWIW:


Wednesday, December 13, 2017

Volokh Conspiracy Moves to Reason.com

Well, I hate the paywall at WaPo. And while I'm not a huge fan of Reason, this move gives me ample reason to visit the site.

 See, "Our move to (paywall-free!) Reason from The Washington Post."


Thursday, April 13, 2017

Professor Eugene Volokh Discusses Freedon Speech on Campus (VIDEO)

Following-up from yesterday, "Eugene Volokh on the Individual Right to Bear Arms (VIDEO)."

He's an interesting guy.

Here's the video of his recent talk at the Reason Weekend, the annual shindig sponsored by the Reason Foundation:



Thursday, September 8, 2016

'What is Aleppo?' (VIDEO)

I'm cutting this guy some slack.

Shoot, the war's gone on so long, it's almost like I yawn at the latest atrocities. Of course I care, but I know nothing's going to happen.

Still, the governor should have known better. He's running for president.

At NYT (via Memeorandum), "‘What Is Aleppo?’ Gary Johnson Asks, in an Interview Stumble."




Saturday, August 6, 2016

Donald Trump's Watching the Olympics to 'See How High the Mexican Pole Vaulters Go...'

Quips the so-called "libertarian" presidential candidate Gary Johnson.

That's pretty funny, I gotta admit.

At the Hill, "Gary Johnson: Trump watching Olympics to see how high Mexican pole vaulters go."

Johnson's really a leftist who likes to smoke weed, heh. Or at least, that's what John Hawkins has been saying, but it sound about right.

And see this interview with Johnson at Reason TV, "Gary Johnson on Trump, the Presidential Election, and Life as a Pot Company CEO":
Johson recently found his "dream job" as CEO of Cannabis Sativa, a publicly traded company that markets weed products. "We want to be the Dom Perignon [of marijuana]," he explains. Johnson is also the chairman of the nonprofit Our America Initiative, which advocates for balanced budgets, defense cuts, drug policy reform, and improved ballot and debate access for third-party candidates.
And, of course, once he became the "libertarian" nominee, he had to issue the obligatory repudiations of the wacky weed. See, "Libertarian Johnson would not use marijuana as president," and "Gary Johnson: 'I've stopped using marijuana' during White House bid."

Hmm, I don't believe it, lol.

Friday, August 14, 2015

Why Intellectuals Hate Capitalism: Interview with Whole Foods Market Co-Founder John Mackey

Reason Magazine talks to Whole Foods' John Mackey, "Why Intellectuals Hate Capitalism: They're jealous, he says, they side with rulers, and they don't understand how markets work":
"Intellectuals have always disdained commerce" says Whole Foods Market co-founder John Mackey. They "have always sided...with the aristocrats to maintain a society where the businesspeople were kind of kept down."

More than any other outlet, Whole Foods has reconfigured what and how America eats and the chain's commitment to high-quality meats, produce, cheeses, and wines is legendary. Since opening his first store in Austin, Texas in 1980, Mackey now oversees operations around the globe and continues to set the pace for what's expected in organic and sustainably raised and harvested food.

Because of Whole Foods' trendy customer base and because Mackey is himself a vegan and champions collaboration between management and workers, it's easy to mistake Mackey for a progressive left-winger. Indeed, an early version of Jonah Goldberg's best-selling 2008 book Liberal Fascism even bore the subtitle "The Totalitarian Temptation from Mussolini to Hillary Clinton and The Totalitarian Temptation from Hegel to Whole Foods."

Yet nothing could be further from the truth—and more distorting of the radical vision of capitalism at the heart of Mackey's thought. A high-profile critic of the minimum wage, Obamacare, and the regulatory state, Mackey believes that free markets are the best way not only to raise living standards but also to explore new ways of building community and creating meaning for individuals and society. At the same time, he challenges all sorts of libertarian dogma, including the notion that publicly traded companies should always seek to exclusively maximize shareholder value (go here to read a 2005 Reason debate about the social responsibility of business featuring Mackey, Milton Friedman, and Cypress Semiconductor CEO T.J. Rodgers). Conscious Capitalism, the book he co-authored with Rajendra Sisodia, lays out a detailed case for Mackey's vision of a post-industrial capitalism that addresses spiritual desire as much as physial need...
More.

And watch the interview: "Whole Foods' John Mackey: Why Intellectuals Hate Capitalism."

I'm not all into organic, although I love this guy's vision.

And, hey, buy his book, Conscious Capitalism, With a New Preface by the Authors: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business.

Friday, May 23, 2014

Surge by UKIP Throws British Labour Into Crisis

At Telegraph UK, "Surge by Ukip throws Labour into crisis for general election":

Ed Miliband's hopes of winning 2015 general election severely undermined by Nigel Farage's success in the local elections.

Ed Miliband's hopes of winning next year’s general election were seriously undermined by the UK Independence Party’s surge in the local and European elections on Friday.

Nigel Farage proclaimed that Ukip had become a “serious player” in British politics after it managed to win council seats in traditional Labour strongholds – and areas which Mr Miliband must secure if he is to become prime minister.

Previously, Ukip’s major advances had largely been at the expense of the Conservatives, who also continued to suffer in the latest polls.

The development saw Labour MPs openly attacking their leader with members of the shadow cabinet at odds over how to counter the emerging Ukip threat.
More at the Independent UK, "Local elections 2014: Ukip makes major gains as Labour takes Tory flagship Hammersmith and Fulham."

RELATED: At Cambrian Dissenters, "EU Election Earthquake - Tribal Voters Need Help to Cross the Rubicon," and the Mellow Jihadi, "The socialist dragon that must be slain!"

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

#Ukraine Illustrates Hard Truths Leftists Won't Face

At Instapundit, "KURT SCHLICHTER: Ukraine Illustrates Hard Truths Liberals Won’t Face":
“Now we are in the almost unimaginable position of looking back at Jimmy Carter as an example of comparatively sure, savvy leadership. The Russians invaded Afghanistan and Carter armed the rebels. The Russians invaded Crimea and Barack Obama went on Ellen to hear the hostess gush about how much America loves Obamacare.”
True, but Carter's about face was too little too late.

BONUS: At Reason, "Students For Liberty Against Ron Paul on Crimean Crisis." And from Dave Weigel, at Slate, "Ron Paul and a New Libertarian Rift Over Ukraine."

Monday, March 10, 2014

Cruz to Rand: Tea Party ≠ Isolationist

From Jonathan Tobin, at Commentary:

Senator Rand Paul is smart enough not to place too much importance on his victory in the presidential straw poll held at the recently concluded CPAC conference. Paul was undoubtedly the favorite of the conservative activists who attended the annual big conservative jamboree and received the biggest ovation of all the GOP stars who spoke there. Yet he is sure to remember that his father Ron also won the straw poll in 2010 and 2011 without it aiding his noisy but ultimately futile 2012 presidential candidacy.

However no one, least of all, his GOP rivals, should think that Paul hasn’t expanded his base from his father’s band of libertarian extremists or won’t be a first tier contender in 2016 when runs for president. He has maintained the momentum he got from his filibuster on drones last year while also carefully avoiding confrontations with the GOP establishment he’s eager to supersede. Many of his backers thought the disastrous government shutdown was a good idea and want to make all members of the party leadership to pay for the compromises they forged in order to extricate Republicans from the corner into which the Tea Party had painted them. However, Paul is quietly backing his Kentucky colleague Mitch McConnell for re-election. He’s also sent out signals to the establishment that he should be trusted to avoid extremism by saying that the shutdown wasn’t such a good idea.

But none of that changes the fact that Paul remains outside the mainstream of his party on foreign policy. As Ted Cruz, Paul’s main rival for the affection of Tea Party voters, reminded the country today on ABC’s “This Week,” it would be a mistake to think the Kentucky senator’s neo-isolationist views represent the sentiments of most conservatives or even Tea Partiers. Resentment against big government and suspicion of President Obama’s actions may have helped boost Paul’s popularity, but the idea that it is Rand’s party on foreign policy is a myth.
Continue reading.

Friday, February 14, 2014

Rand Paul: 'Republicans Will Not Win Again In My Lifetime'

Senator Paul's interviewed at the Blaze, at Pat Dollard's, "Libertarian Rand Paul to Glenn Beck: ‘I Think Republicans Will Not Win Again In My Lifetime."

Also at Memeorandum, "Rand Paul's Prediction About Future Presidential Elections May Frighten Half the Country."

And at Politico, "Rand Paul needs ‘new Republican party’":
Sen. Rand Paul is warning his party that Republicans will not take the White House again unless the party changes.

“I think Republicans will not win again in my lifetime for the presidency unless they become a new GOP, a new Republican Party,” Paul said on Glenn Beck’s show on TheBlaze in an interview that aired Thursday. “And it has to be a transformation, not a little tweaking at the edges.”

The Kentucky Republican said the GOP needs to have a “better message” and one that appeals to people “in a way they can understand it.” He said when he appears before young people, for example, he talks about civil liberties instead of taxes.

“Republicans haven’t gone to African-Americans or to Hispanics and said, ‘You know what? The war on drugs, Big Government, has had a racial outcome. It’s disproportionately affected the poor and the black and brown among us,’” Paul said.

The rumored 2016 presidential candidate said it’s “too early” to make a decision on whether he will be the Republican that takes back the White House, but he repeated his frequent message that Republicans need to appeal to more Americans.

“There is a struggle going on within the Republican Party,” Paul said. “It’s not new, and I’m not ashamed of it. I’m proud of the fact that there is a struggle. And I will struggle to make the Republican Party a different party, a bigger party, a more diverse party, and a party that can win national elections again.”

Monday, January 27, 2014

Rand Paul’s Paleolibertarian Patrimony

Dave Swindle used to repeatedly warn against backing Rand Paul, arguing that he was a carbon copy of his father Ron. See, for example, "The One Question Conservative Rand Paul Supporters Need to Answer," and "Was Sarah Palin Snookered Into Endorsing a Stealth Anti-Israel Candidate?"

But I thought he gave a great speech to the Heritage Foundation last year, and I've mentioned my possible support for a Rand Paul presidential bid in 2016. As always, the proof will be how genuine his views turn out to be. That being said, you know hard-left outlets like the New York Times would love to destroy him, so take this exegesis of Paul's ideological "patrimony" with the usual grain of salt.

See, "Rand Paul’s Mixed Inheritance":
As Rand Paul test-markets a presidential candidacy and tries to broaden his appeal, he is also trying to take libertarianism, an ideology long on the fringes of American politics, into the mainstream. Midway through his freshman term, he has become a prominent voice in Washington’s biggest debates — on government surveillance, spending and Middle East policy.

In the months since he commanded national attention and bipartisan praise for his 13-hour filibuster against the Obama administration’s drone strike program, Mr. Paul has impressed Republican leaders with his staying power, in part because of the stumbles of potential rivals and despite some of his own.

“Senator Paul is a credible national candidate,” said Mitt Romney, who ran for president as the consummate insider in 2012. “He has tapped into the growing sentiment that government has become too large and too intrusive.” In an email, Mr. Romney added that the votes and dollars Mr. Paul would attract from his father’s supporters could help make him “a serious contender for the Republican nomination.”

But if Mr. Paul reaps the benefits of his father’s name and history, he also must contend with the burdens of that patrimony. And as he has become a politician in his own right and now tours the circuit of early primary states, Mr. Paul has been calibrating how fully he embraces some libertarian precepts.

“I want to be judged by who I am, not by a relationship,” Mr. Paul, a self-described libertarian Republican, said in an interview last week. “I have wanted to develop my own way, and my own, I guess, connections to other intellectual movements myself when I came to Washington.”

Coming of age in America’s first family of libertarianism — he calls his father, a three-time presidential aspirant, “my hero” — Rand Paul was steeped in a narrow, rightward strain of the ideology, according to interviews, documents, and a review of speeches, articles and books.

Some of its adherents have formulated provocative theories on race, class and American history, and routinely voice beliefs that go far beyond the antiwar, anti-big-government, pro-civil-liberties message of the broader movement that has attracted legions of college students, Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and Tea Party activists.

That worldview, often called “paleolibertarianism,” emerges from the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Alabama, started with money raised by the senior Mr. Paul. It is named for the Austrian émigré who became an intellectual godfather of modern libertarian economic thinking, devoted to an unrestricted free market.

Some scholars affiliated with the Mises Institute have combined dark biblical prophecy with apocalyptic warnings that the nation is plunging toward economic collapse and cultural ruin. Others have championed the Confederacy. One economist, while faulting slavery because it was involuntary, suggested in an interview that the daily life of the enslaved was “not so bad — you pick cotton and sing songs.”

Mr. Paul says he abhors racism, has never visited the institute and should not have to answer for the more extreme views of all of those in the libertarian orbit.

“If you were to say to someone, ‘Well, you’re a conservative Republican or you are a Christian conservative Republican, does that mean that you think when the earthquake happened in Haiti that was God’s punishment for homosexuality?’ Well, no,” he said in an earlier interview. “It loses its sense of proportion if you have to go through and defend every single person about whom someone says is associated with you.”

Still, his 2011 book, “The Tea Party Goes to Washington,” praises some institute scholars, recommending their work and the institute website.

And he has sometimes touched on themes far from the mainstream. He has cautioned in the past of a plan to create a North American Union with a single currency for the United States, Mexico and Canada, and a stealth United Nations campaign to confiscate civilian handguns. He has repeatedly referred to the “tyranny” of the federal government.

Since becoming a national figure, Mr. Paul has generally stayed on safer ground. His denunciations of government intrusion on Americans’ privacy have been joined by lawmakers in both parties and have resonated with the public — though no other member of Congress as yet has joined him in his planned class-action suit against the National Security Agency.

He has renounced many of the isolationist tenets central to libertarianism, backed away from his longstanding objections to parts of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and teamed with members of the Congressional Black Caucus in calling for an easing of drug-sentencing laws. He recently unveiled a plan for investment in distressed inner cities.

Much of that is in keeping with the left-right alliance Mr. Paul promotes, an alternative to what he dismisses as a “mushy middle.” Such partnerships, he says, “include people who firmly do believe in the same things, that happen to serve in different parties.”

In recent months, potential rivals for leadership of the Republican Party have depicted him as an extremist. Before the recent investigations into political abuses by his administration, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey said Mr. Paul’s “strain of libertarianism” was “very dangerous.” And Senator Ted Cruz of Texas told donors in New York that in a national campaign Mr. Paul could not escape Ron Paul’s ideological history.

Mr. Paul is not the first political son encumbered by a father’s legacy, but his mantle is unusually heavy. He has been his father’s apprentice, aide, surrogate and, finally, successor. Side-by-side portraits of father and son adorn one wall in his Senate conference room...
Still more at the link. The piece goes into some detail on the "fringe" paleos like Lew Rockwell (who had a thing for Cindy Sheehan sometime back) and Murray Rothbard. And it mentions how Rand, right before announcing his run for office in 2009, he appeared on nutjob Alex Jones' radio program. There's a lot of unsavory conspiracists and racists in those swamps, and frankly, just being Rand Paul he may never fully escape them.


Friday, January 10, 2014

America Has Already Gone John Galt

From Roger Simon, at PJ Media, "Who Needs Ayn Rand?":
Tell all your “Objectivist” friends and the libertarian gang at Reason magazine to break out the champagne. Americans may have skipped the movie of Atlas Shrugged, nor have many read any of Ayn Rand’s works, but they have taken the author’s advice anyway and gone John Galt, quitting the work force in record numbers. According to Zero Hedge, the latest figures show the labor participation rate at 35 year low.

Realistically, it’s even more than 35 because that figure reflects an employment bump when larger numbers of women joined the work force in the seventies and eighties. (They’re gone now, with or without Gloria Steinem.)

Currently a record 91.8 million Americans are no longer looking for work. That’s almost one and a half times the entire population of France.

Although I admit to libertarian tendencies, I don’t think any of us can celebrate because of this. It’s an economic disaster that should be blowing even Chris Christie off the front pages.

In fact, it’s much worse than that. It’s a human emotional disaster. Freud may have been wrong about a number of things, but he was right about this. Two mainstays that get us through life, other than religion, which Freud didn’t cotton to, are “love and work.” I don’t know about love, but the work part of our lives has been brutally kicked out from under us in the Obama years.
Continue reading.

HAT TIP: Theo Spark.

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Dana Loesch Moves to Texas!

To join Glenn Beck on the radio.

Congratulations Dana!