Category: Uncategorized

The dubious dugong writes: Your commitment to Libertarianism in fact informs your theology. Shouldn’t your theology inform your political theory not the other way around? If your precommitment to a “free-will” political theory is false then what does it say about everything else you believe? Finding refuge in quantum mechanics to save your “freedom” is speculative at best. It’s just another scientific theory waiting to be overthrown by a more fashionable one. Besides even if it “works” – utility – has no bearing on whether it’s “true” – veracity.

It’s possible, of course, as I was a libertarian before I was a Christian. I don’t see the two as intrinsicly related, although certainly many people do. There’s plenty of Christian Democrats who believe Jesus mandated socialism and cheers any form of love between two men. I am not at all concerned about the “free-will” political being overturned, as my Christianity does not depend in any way on it, furthermore, considering the level of cognitive dissonance which is accepted by Democrats and Republicans everyday, I wouldn’t see any need to worry even if it did.

All theology outside Scripture is speculation, inherently so and far more so than political economy. My primary reason for believing in Jesus Christ is that I have seen his works in people’s lives. My primary reason for believing in libertarian political theory is that I have seen the total failure of every other theory in society and history. In both cases, there is logic that supports my witness as well. But yes, truth is what it is, and utility is nothing more than a useful instrument in attempting to comprehend it.

I believe there is a Vox’s Wager, if I may be so bold, to be made with regards to Free Will vs Omniderigence. If the choice and responsibility is mine, if God is limited for whatever reason and requires me to act, then I am compelled to act, speak and witness at every opportunity, for I will be held responsible for my failures. If, on the other hand, an omniderigent God is micro-managing my life, then I have a ready excuse for failing to act, failing to speak and failing to witness, for all such failures can be blamed on God’s Will that I not do so as he controls my actions. Vox’s Wager is that if I am correct, I will be proven to have acted wisely in attempting to serve God. If I am incorrect, I am still in accordance with God’s Will as he micro-manages my life.

Conversely, the proponent of God’s omniderigence is no better off if he wins his bet, for he has done nothing more than me. But if he is incorrect, then he run a risk of being misled into doing little of Kingdom value that will survive the fire of the believer’s judgment.

Strange Semantics runs into cognitive dissonance: I began to wonder, why is it that so many conservatives and liberals think that there are biases stemming from the opposite end of the political spectrum in every aspect of society? Can they both be right? Is the United States government, including the courts, education system, and probably even the waste water folks, composed entirely of people who are both flaming commie pinkos and rightwing fascist authoritarians? And the media! Clearly they’re out to get Bush, and clearly they were out to get Clinton, but they are out to get Bush more than they were out to get Clinton, and they were out to get Clinton more than they are out to get Bush. They can’t both be right. Please, stop the insanity!

SS begins to see the light, for both sides are right. What the idiot Left doesn’t understand, and the idiot not-Right (that thinks they are) refuses to recognize, is that commie pinkos and rightwing fascist authoritarians are very closely related. They both worship government and the collective, and believe that an elite has a right and a responsibility to rule over the masses using any means necessary. Both hate individual freedom – the libertinism of the Left is only a temporary waystation, see the prudishness of Nazi, Soviet and PRC culture by way of example – both require all-encompassing power on the part of the state. What is the difference? Define the difference… if you can. It’s impossible; the only difference is that Nazi thinking was both more sophisticated and more bizarre than the crude Communist thinking that postulated a class consciousness that not only never existed historically but has been a major disappointment to Marxians as it has totally failed to manifest itself.

One of Hitler’s great concerns was to figure out how to enact totalitarian rule while simultaneously harnessing the individual genius required for entrepeneurialism and economic growth for the benefit of the State. In doing so, he hoped to avoid what he correctly identified as a major flaw in Marxist thinking. The crippled and static nature of the Soviet Union and other socialist and communist economies was predicted long in advance of the world learning just how bad it truly was. Hitler never found the answer for which he was searching, but he was looking in the right place. History has shown that our Keynesian leadership came up with a better and far more humane solution, but as they are learning to their dismay, the long run does eventually arrive if you rule long enough. They may hit their own crisis of socialism yet, although I truly hope they can find a way to extricate themselves – and us – from it intact. We do not live in freedom, but even comfortable modern serfdom is better than many alternatives.

The fact that the two Keynesian factions fight tooth-and-nail should neither be a surprise nor seen as a proof that they are polar opposites. Nazis and communists battled in Berlin just as Mensheviks and Bolsheviks battled in Moscow. The internecine wars are always the most bitter.

Jonah Goldberg writes in NRO’s Corner: I really didn’t like Al Gore and I’ve disliked Kerry for not particularly dissimilar reasons. Gore was a panderer, he was arrogant, aloof, he saw government as a solution to any problem etc etc. I think you can make a very similar case about Kerry, though I understand there are differences too, particularly on foreign policy.

But wasn’t it George Delano who said that anytime anyone is hurting, the government must be there to help them? Methinks the similarities run a little broader than Mr. Goldberg would like to admit.

Jamie was wondering if the Reader blogroll is some sort of best of the best or something. It isn’t. There are only two requirements for the blogroll. One is asking to be added to it. The second is having a link to my column archive on WND and one to Vox Popoli. Do both and I’ll be pleased to add your blog to it. I’m aware that there are readers out there with blogs not on the blogroll, but as they haven’t asked to be added, I presumed they did not wish it.

WND reports: Iraq’s new interim constitution sounds many of the same themes as the U.S. Constitution in guaranteeing freedom of the people – with one stark difference: There is no right to keep and bear arms in the new charter. As Secretary of State Colin Powell hailed Monday’s signing of the document, which lays out the time line for Iraqi self-government, he encouraged his audience to read the new constitution. “Read this administrative law, and read what the Governing Council has written for the people of Iraq,” he said in a speech commemorating International Women’s Day Monday. “Read what it says about the rights of all Iraqis, the rights of women. Read what it says about a free judiciary. Read what it says about the military firmly being under control of the civilian authority.”

Powell next talked positively about arms control in a new Iraq, followed by mention of “rights” and “liberty.” “Read what it says about arms not being allowed within the society except under the control of civilian authorities,” he said. “Read what it says about democracy, rights, liberty, and what the new Iraq will look like. …”

Isn’t that fabulous! Now, when the next Hussein comes along, the Iraqi people will still be helpless! Wonderful! And I don’t know why anyone should bother reading Iraq’s new constitution, when our political leadership and judiciary clearly don’t read ours.

So, what did you do to celebrate International Women’s Day?

Dick Morris agrees with my thinking: Should Kerry be re-elected in 2008, his vice president likely will become the party’s nominee in 2012, like Al Gore was in 2000. If that person wins the 2012 nomination, as history suggests, Morris writes, “that means that Hillary would be out in the cold until at least 2016 and, if the Democrat won and was re-elected, until 2020. She’ll be 73 by then.” If Kerry were to lose re-election in 2008, his vice president would be the favorite for the top spot in 2012.

I argued that she would likely go for VP a while ago. Failure costs her nothing – in this case it would be Jean Francois’ fault – and would position her nicely for the next go-round. While America’s favorite gigolo does have a chance to win, I don’t think that he will win at the end of the day since there are enough War and Gay Marriage Bush Democrats to make up for the many libertarians and disenchanted ex-Republican conservatives who will be voting third party.

Rod Dreher writes: Brooks, who is Jewish, does not defend Gibson’s film, but he does say that the narcissism and spiritual sloth that characterizes popular religion in America today corrodes public virtue. I wanted to shout, “Hallelujah!” when I finished that column. I was raised Methodist, and have passed through the Southern Baptist church and the Episcopal Church before I finally ended up in the Roman Catholic church 11 years ago. With the possible exception of the Southern Baptist church, I don’t recall ever having heard any kind of Christianity preached that wasn’t essentially a spiritualized gloss on Dr. Phil-ism. The happy exceptions are so rare I’d sooner expect to find rashers of bacon in the Riyadh IHOP than hear something substantive and challenging.

For me, “The Passion of the Christ” acted as a head-clearer from all the bourgeois kultursmog one gets in church these days, where one is challenged to do little more than be nice to others and accept that God affirms us in our Okayness. When I went to mass on Ash Wednesday, I was still reeling from the searing grandeur of the film, and thinking very much about my own sins, and the role I played in Christ’s suffering. The priest began his homily by saying, “I was going to preach a fire-and-brimstone homily, but that’s not my style.” This was supposed to be a joke, as his homilies all sound as intelligent and modulated as an extended NPR commentary, minus the edge (an Ira Glass monologue is “Sinners In the Hands of an Angry God” by comparison). And you know, I wanted to scream. I’m so sick of this Jesus-is-our-Buddy stuff. Our Lord in Dockers. Who needs it, ya know?

I am not only a Southern Baptist, but one heavily influenced by Greg Boyd’s warfare theology. Why does Jesus Christ matter? Because the world is ruled by a sadistic supernatural serial killer, against whom only the power of the Son of Man can stand. People like to think of Jesus as the Lamb, but they forget that he is also the Lion.

If the world doesn’t hate you, then you’re doing something wrong. And if you’ve got a pastor who teaches Dr. Phil instead of Jesus Christ, you might as well stay home and watch football.

We just got back from the range, and the girl likes to kill paper. Keeps it black, sans laser no less. We broke in one of her friends there – never held, much less fired a gun before, but she’s into it now. If I’m aiming at you, my suggestion is to duck. At 50 feet, I tend to shoot a little high. We did a little window-shopping afterwards and I have to say that I am very much digging the new grip lasers.

A few people have asked about lifting, and now Jamie is wondering if I’m on steroids. First, I’m not anywhere nearly that big – 370? – I don’t think so. My max was at 325 a few years ago, but I’ve dropped about ten pounds with all the running for soccer so now it’s probably down to around 275-285. I usually start out with ten reps at 225 and end with four at 255, but Space Bunny’s got me mixing up my routine a little more to prevent developing a shoulder problem.

Anyhow, I’ve never done anything but whey protein and some creatine. I haven’t used either for years now, but I’m thinking about getting back with the whey.

I often wonder if people are even paying attention… and by paying attention I mean reading an entire sentence as opposed to simply latching onto one or two expected or particularly glaring words in the sentence and reacting to them. I have never once advocated the elimination of the government military and, in fact, I believe it to be a necessary function. One of the reasons I scored in the 126 range and not higher is that I believe open immigration is not a properly libertarian concept as while people must be able to freely leave a society, outsiders have no inherent right to join it. Indeed, Europe is learning how even partially open borders can end a society and tear apart its fabric in a relatively small period of time.

Indeed, Communist China could easily swamp any open-immigration society simply by sending in millions of immigrants to advocate a decidely non-libertarian structure. The defense of the borders and the defense of private property have long been considered among the only proper functions of government. However, what is profoundly libertarian about my position on the military is that I reject the notion that the state may have a monopoly on force. There is no reason why a citizen should not own a fleet of F-16s and hire them out to foreign countries if he so chooses. When the state has the means to balance a megalomaniac citizen ala Ted Turner and the citizens have the means to threaten the state, the situation is optimal. It is much better than having one and not the other.

People are capable of self-control. There is nothing preventing the leaders of the US military from overthrowing the US government anytime they choose, except that they do not and have not for more than 200 years. If an armed society is a polite society, a society where citizens are not out-gunned by the military is a society of limited and small government.

In any case, all things come to an end. There is no static system that will allow humans to live peacefully forever, because humans are inherently evil and someone will always seek to end the comity by enforcing their will over others. In our current system, government is the primary means of doing so, and the sooner one recognizes that, the sooner one realizes that government is often nothing more than a powerful instrument used by individual and interest groups to control and dictate the behavior of others.