by Alex Fidel

Get a first peek at the interview I did with Gov. Gary Johnson that I did for a GJ Grassroots Podcast I hosted that has yet to be released by the campaign, on my radio show-turned-podcast Freethought. Click here to download the podcast. This would be the third time Gov. Johnson has appeared on my program, the first time talking to him since he announced his presidential bid.

by Alex Fidel

Click here to download the new episode of my radio show-turned-podcast, Freethought. Guests are John Stahl, candidate for U.S. Congress (R, CA-50) and DuelingBarstools.com publician-in-chief Ryan Nohea Garcia. Plenty of good music, too. Your feedback is greatly appreciated!

by Alex Fidel

“We should drug test every high school student.”

-Dick Morris

I may just be restating what Peter said, but I don’t think Dick Morris would support such a policy if he knew the real implications of it. Would he really support police pointing their guns at teenagers, forcing them to piss in a cup for a drug test as a condition of existing as a citizen in America? I’m sure he doesn’t think in those terms, since it is libertarians’ jargon that laws rest on the idea that if you break them, somewhere down the line a cop will be pointing a gun to your face, if you resist arrest enough.
…Which gets me to thinking if such a law were to be imposed, what happens if they resist drug testing? Are we going to arrest them? Shoot them? Kick them out of school even though they are forced to pay for it through taxes? What about the innocent kids who don’t do drugs, are we going to violate their privacy and dignity, and turn America into a country where everyone is guilty until proven innocent? All socialist countries have the guilty before proven innocent legal framework, Mr. Morris. So if you truly want to repeal Obama’s socialism (as the title of your book suggests), don’t be so quick to unknowingly replace it with a different form of socialism, even though your intentions disregard that. I don’t think he would actually support such a brutal police state, but such a policy that he advocates may have such unintended consequences. All the sort of rhetorical questions I ask above simply address the notion that government is force. I don’t think Dick Morris thinks in those terms, since that notion is typically libertarian jargon, so if he were to read this, I would hope my rhetorical questions would get him to think about the issue.

by Alex Fidel

Rahm Emmanuel won the Chicago mayoral race by a slim margin above 50%. Nothin’ fishy there…

Which reminds me of the line from Zappa’s “Strictly Genteel”-
‘may the lord have mercy for the people of Chicago,
for the terrible food
these people must eat’

I’ll try and keep an eye out for what Mr. Doesn’t Let a Crisis Go to Waste is doing in Chicago, as [fairly] elected mayor.

(Side note: should I fear for my life for writing this article?)

by Alex Fidel

A little late, as you might have missed the first episode, which was yesterday.

Anyways, my radio show Freethought Radio is back, at a new time of Wednesdays at 8PM-10PM PST, only on www.ksunradio.com

As always, we have the Dueling Barstools On-Air segment, where the publician-in-chief himself, El Dueling Barstool calls in and we discuss the issues of the day.

The special guest schedule is as follows:

Feb 23- Jimmy McMillan of the Rent Is Too Damn High Party
Mar 2- Tim Aymar, singer of Control Denied (last brainchild of the late Chuck Schuldiner) and Pharoah
Mar 9- Ken Schoolland, author of The Adventures of Jonathan Gullible: A Free Market Odyssey
Mar 16- Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pac/Ron Paul’s 2008 campaign economic advisor
Mar 23- Gary Johnson, former NM Gov and badass truth-teller

Working on getting Howard Kaylan (aka Eddie of Flo & Eddie), who is the vocalist for The Turtles, and was the vocalist for Flo & Eddie as well as Frank Zappa & The Mothers of Invention. Unfortunately Mark Volman (aka Flo of Flo & Eddie) didn’t want to, my guess is media shyness because they are still together performing with the Turtles. They were in The Mothers from 1970-72, starting out in 200 Motels all the way up till Chunga’s Revenge, The Fillmore East June 1971, and Just Another Band From L.A. before Zappa had his stage injury and they took a long hiatus and it would just be Frank Zappa, no Mothers.

Anyways, tune in to my show every Wednesday at 8PM PST!

by Alex Fidel

Jimmy McMillan at the New York Governor's race debate, 2010

The very vocal and eccentric founder of the Rent Is Too Damn High Party, Jimmy McMillan, joins KSUN’s own Freethought Radio this Wednesday, Feb. 23rd at 8PM PST.

Now to my surprise, he did not advocate rent controls. Usually people with little knowledge of economics with throw in the idea of rent/price controls, without knowing the unintended consequences of such policies. Maybe Jimmy is just ideologically all over the place. But let me explain as to why the rent is too damn high (fuck yes, that rhymes!).

I’m self-educated on economics. My mentors (who are probably dead) are Frederic Bastiat, Henry Hazlitt, F.A. Hayek, and Milton Friedman. Naturally, I think the crop of SSU economics professors are sub par, but then again, I can’t think of a single college besides George Mason University that aren’t shills for John Maynard Keynes.

Rent prices are meant to show the most productive use of that land, whether it be residential, commercial office space, or torn down to make a farm. Prices are there to make the risk of investment worthwhile. No one is going to invest in real estate if they aren’t going to get a return, although this principle was overturned thanks to Congress, Fannie, Freddie, and the Federal Reserve completely absolving all risk in the real estate market through regulations, diminishing lending standards, and artificially low interest rates, causing the housing bubble that precipitated in the 2008 recession (more on why the housing bubble was caused by the unintended consequences of government policy in our interview with Peter Schiff on March 16th).

The consequences of artificially lowering the price of rent leads to added fees, such as the ability to charge for use of the key, to various other regulate-and-evade cat and mouse games. The lack of financial reward to the landlords’ risk/investment leads to taking away the incentive to provide for basic upkeep; they therefore choose the renter who would accept the most meager accommodations.

There is a sad, yet tragically ironic, quiz put forth by some professor (someone who writes for the Mises Institute) as to whether his students could tell whether a picture of an apartment complex has either been bombed or subjected to rent controls. The similarity is stunning. That leads to the question, which is worse for a country- war, or the bad consequences of good intentions?

As we see in all areas of commerce with little government “help,” competition improves quality and lowers price. As small-businessman and former NM Governor Gary Johnson puts it- ‘best product, best service, lowest price.’

What people often don’t realize is that regulations are often supported by big businesses- they can bare the costs of meeting these requirements, while their competitors, both big & small, cannot. This ends up placing a huge burden on small businesses.

My mom once helped rebuild a burnt down building in exchange for a reserved apartment, where the rent was very low. Today, you would have to do a ton of meaningless paperwork and probably have to pay a fee to some government agency. These have very little effect on the quality of apartments; it only scares away entrepreneurs, causing shortages and raising prices.

A very prominent member of Congress (House or Senate I’m not sure) Jim McGovern left his position to go home and start an inn. However, the cost of meeting fire safety regulation requirements (which he argued had little to no effect on real fire safety, but were just lobbied to be passed by established businesses to keep out people like him) caused him to close up shop. He then returned to the Congress, and warned his fellow liberals about the dangers of over-regulation. While they have the best of intentions, their lack of economic knowledge and obligation to their special interest buddies have many perverse consequences.

The answer is not to get rid of lobbying so that regulations are “pure” and without steering from established businesses/labor unions, because the problem still lies in the absence of economics 101 in the minds of politicians. The answer is to get rid of regulations so that big business/labor never get a chance to get their hands on the direction of regulations in the first place. “Evil” Wal-Mart was in favor of ObamaCare, and now they’re trying to please the Obama administration with their selling of healthier foods as a quid pro-quo for not coming after their non-unionized labor practices. That’s not capitalism. Big businesses would not have to rely on their political connections and subsidies, but rather if they provide the “best product, best service, at the lowest price.” Anyone can emerge from there. Even today, with our heavily regulated, small-business crushing economic environment, boutique shops in all industries can survive, but unfortunately, as Bastiat’s principle of the unseen states, we cannot see all the businesses that haven’t formed because the regulatory framework is so burdensome, it is an ultimate protection of big businesses.

So, if you don’t like big business, support free markets. Now I’m not sure if Jimmy “Rent” McMillan would like to hear that or not… no, really. I don’t know where he stands, because he’s so out there, that he’s not very consistent and is a really tough character to talk to because he blathers on about nothing. But once you’re done, and you listen back to the conversation, it is definitely entertaining to listen to. Tune in this Wendesday at 8PM PST at www.ksunradio.com to hear the man himself. If only someone would tell him that the rent is too damn high because the government is too damn big… I tried, but he just keeps talking and talking and talking and talking…

by Alex Fidel

Gary Johnson placed 3rd in the CPAC 2011 straw poll. That may seem like the short end of the stick, but think of the little recognition Johnson got, and how little in advance he scored the speaking position. This just goes to show that people are ready for bold spending cuts, which Gary made sure to mention amounted to $1.5 TRILLION; a balanced budget tomorrow.

I’m glad Ron Paul won, I’d obviously support with full effort a Ron Paul 2012 campaign. But I have to think in real terms. I know it’s hard to say this, I’m just as big of a Ron Paul fan as all of you are, but Ron Paul is not immortal. He’s going to be around 77 in 2012, and has to lead for 8 years. I’m sure he’d rather live stress free with his family rather than the tremendous job of president. Gary Johnson is younger, an extremely fit athlete, and has held a similar position on the state level as governor of New Mexico. That’s just my 2 cents on why I think Ron Paul should not run for president again, even though I’d support him 110% if he did. Now, I’d love to see him really do a lot of significant spreading of the “brushfires of liberty” in the minds of men. R3VOLution of the mind is where it’s at. And even though Gov. Johnson isn’t as philosophical as Ron Paul, you know that he’d go further than just a balanced budget. He’s said time and time again that he supports ending the Fed, and it’s not like he’s 100% cost/benefit. In one of his State of the State speeches, he said “Man is superior to government, not the other way around.” Definitely a consistent belief in the philosophy of liberty, just he also prefers to take it from a business standpoint. It’s easier to sell vetoes to the public when it’s in terms of cost/benefit rather than just pure philosophical. That’ll beget the idea that government can do better with much less, which will lead to an increase in limited government philosophy throughout the nation. Gov. Johnson did shift public opinion on school choice in NM significantly.

If the 3rd place is an indication of anything, it is to not underestimate Gary Johnson one bit. He could’ve been down in the percentage ranks with Donald Trump for saying “legalize marijuana” at a conservative conference. Think about it… Johnson ‘12.

by Alex Fidel

Pension bubbles are about to burst. CA Gov. Jerry Brown declares a fiscal emergency, saying that he will need to raise taxes (bad) and cut spending (good). Unfortunately, the cuts do not touch pensions since they are obligated by law. The state will soon need to jump through hoops in order to meet these obligations, since the pensions are very underfunded (because they were overpromised).

One way they could help fund these unfunded liabilities is to lease or sell off wildlife preservation lands owned by the state government. That would mean putting those poor endangered species/habitats in danger, since it could be used for productive purposes. Best case scenario, it could become a fee-based public park, but still littering and ignorance of preservation/conservation by people who would attend these parks might do damage to an endangered species. Worse, these lands could become retail environments.

The unintended consequences of liberals’ advocating massive state spending will to lead the state selling these lands to fill their contractual obligations. State spending leads to many new programs, new programs leads to new agencies, new agencies leads to new state employees. Unfortunately, agencies are not run like businesses, so they overpay their workers beyond what is worth the value of their labor, and also beyond what is sustainable. Not to mention that they hire more than what is needed. Thus, you have this pension crisis.

So, if you are a liberal (I would also ask how you found out about this blog ), the next time you consider spending increases, consider this- public sector unions don’t care about their workers. They just care about power and leverage. They promised their workers pensions that aren’t even 100% funded- when they protest, they’re protesting for money that isn’t even there, and never will be. They are putting the state into a fiscal hole, which will require state legislators to take drastic measures. They can either a) grow a pair, and cut government where it needs to be in a common-sense business way, ala Gary Johnson, which would actually improve services by reducing inefficient agencies, programs, and the bloated defined benefits that go along with their employees, etc, or b) cut out of education without touching teachers and other edu-employees defined benefit plans, raise taxes, and yes, sell off lands, including environmental preserves, which liberals care oh-so-much about.

Oh, and before you throw an ad hominem/strawman my way saying I want state workers to work for ’slave wages,’ I’m not against employees having benefits. They just have to be affordable and sustainable (100% funded from the getgo if it is defined rather than a pay-in). As per public sector wages/benefits, let’s tie it to average private sector wages/benefits. That way, they’ll lobby state legislators to pursue policies that grow the private sector, rather than diminish it. It’s a pipe dream, but hey, it’ll certainly make CA more business friendly.

The point I’m driving at is that the state can still offer basic services like police, fire, etc. at all the same efficacy but at a much, much lower price tag. Gary Johnson did it in New Mexico, and I hope he gets the chance to do it for the whole country.

*This post inspired by Damon Root on yesterday’s episode of Judge Nap’s Freedom Watch when he talked about state governments having to sell of these wildlife preserves.

by Alex Fidel

As I completely expected, an element of the failure of Prop 19 was due to the impact of vicious rumors and propaganda spread by growers and dealers who want to protect their monopoly.

…most of the growers from Northern California’s fertile Humboldt and Mendocino counties were against Prop. 19. … “People will want something faceless and easy,” one grower told me. “They want their fucking Big Mac. In order to make something of quality, you have to deal with a lot more labor and a lot more time. Just use machines, turn out crap, sell it cheap.”

Now the article also points out that the whole growing community amounted 65,000 ballots cast in the 2010 election, but the rumors they spread about how it will jeopardize medical marijuana patients’ legal status may have added to a lot more No votes than just the 65,000. That coupled with people who still believe the tired, old D.A.R.E. mantras lead to the death of Prop 19. A large number of conservatives and Tea Partiers supported Prop 19. Radio talk show host Roger Hedgecock, as well as one of his fill-ins, supported Prop 19. So it’s really a fault of party-line Republicans who don’t really want to open their mind to Tea Party, limited-government, and libertarian ideals and virtually people of all political ideologies who still see pot as the devil’s lettuce. Combine that with grower propaganda and you have the death of Prop 19 (though I’m no statistician, just an observer).

But whether it is a grower wanting to protect their monopoly or a family who is not willing to look outside the box on this issue, they fail to see the unintended consequence of their beliefs, which is that they are subjecting millions of otherwise law-abiding Americans to the criminal justice system. I don’t care what argument growers and social-conservatives throw at us. ‘It’ll shrink our market share,’ they will say, but they can always innovate out. If they refuse to meet the needs of their customers, then they shouldn’t be in the business in the first place. Americans don’t have a choice when a cop fines or jails them for smoking pot. They can’t innovate out of that. Non-violent behavior among consenting adults should not be subject to the will of the government or the votes of the majority, that’s why we are a republic and not a democracy, because we have certain liberties which are to be left untouched, even if the will of the majority says otherwise.

So let’s not just let Tim Lincecum smoke, or Willie Nelson, Miley Cyrus, Gary Johnson, or Michael Phelps. Let’s let America smoke.

by Alex Fidel

Yahoo/Drudge reports that the FCC is asking app developers to create apps that help users see if their internet service provider is blocking content:

“Our goal is to foster user-developed applications that shine light on any practice that might be inconsistent with the free and open Internet,” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said.

The challenge also tries to boost useful research into ways to measure, preserve and track the openness of the Internet.

The FCC said apps could provide real-time data to an individual experiencing a slow Internet connection speed, test networks for Internet service providers and aggregate network data for academics and policymakers.

Now if only there was an app showing when the government blocks websites thanks to new FCC net neutrality regulations…

by Alex Fidel

I’m sure some of you are familiar with the RLC. Well, I decided to start up the RLCCA SD. Basically the duty includes showing up to Republican Party meetings and affecting change. If you are a registered Republican in San Diego County, you can vote on measures, bylaws, and whatever those stuffy establishment types do at those meetings.

The Republican Party of San Diego County meets at the Town & Country Resort in San Diego on the second Monday of every month at 7 PM. For January, that would be the 10th. I’m going to be there.

A lot of Libertarian Party people would consider this taboo. But think of it this way- do you make a bigger statement by talking to a small group of libertarians who already agree with you or by talking to party-line Republicans and social conservatives who never really hear clear and concise arguments for liberty? I would think the latter. Besides, I would get a kick out of making party-line Republicans feel uncomfortable. And who knows, you might even be able to change some minds.

Please follow the RLCCA SD Facebook page, and if you can, show up to the meeting on the 10th. You don’t even have to be a Republican, but if you want to vote on things, you have to be registered Republican in San Diego county.

by Alex Fidel

Found this article whilst snowboarding in CO, but due to limited internet access couldn’t post it here until now.

It states all the intertwining between cartels and governments, such as the Taliban:

A March report by our government’s Congressional Research Service (CRS) noted that the number of “foreign terrorist groups” involved in the global narcotics trade “jumped from 14 groups in 2003 to 18 in 2008.”

The Taliban, which is not on the State Department terrorist list but is at war with the U.S. in Afghanistan, has alliances with narcotics traffickers, although al-Qaeda does not appear to sanction such connections, according to the CRS.

This is all the more reason to legalize drugs. If we allow these substances to be prohibited, the black market will be the distributor of the product, instead of the free market. Because of moralism, the Taliban is making money in the black market instead of aspiring entrepreneurs and business people in the (sort of) free market.

Narco-cartels in Mexico have corrupted almost every level of government.

No surprise there. It’s factoids like these that make me agree oh so much with Judge Jim Gray when he said the War on Drugs is the second worst thing in American history, right below slavery.

(Happy Belated New Years to all the DB readers!)

by Alex Fidel

I’m writing up in the sky again to rant about the TSA.

This time, I went through the metal detector, got my stuff, and walked off. At first, I was relieved and certainly not as pissed off as when I went through the body scanners all those times. But then I thought about the arbitrary nature of putting people randomly through either one. If we were all equally likely to be terrorists, why not search us the same? The whole arbitrary nature reeks of facism (I think I use the term aptly, unlike certain conspiracy theorist individuals whom you all know I dislike).

But anyway, here are some oxymorons: “Liberty Tax” (name of an actual income tax preparations company) and “libertarian socialist.”

by Alex Fidel

Today marks 9 years since Chuck Schuldiner, the driving force behind his bands Death and Control Denied, passed away from a brain stem tumor. Death started out in 1983 as Mantas, arguably the first death metal band. They later evolved from a bare-bones simplicity into incorporating deep melodies, progressive complexity, and powerful lyrics. No Death album is truly the same, as the lineup has changed from album to album. Many Death veterans include Paul Masvidal and Sean Reinert, guitarist/vocalist and drummer of Cynic (respectively), guitar virtuoso James Murphy, and Howard Stern Show host and drummer Richard Christy. Chuck had the kind of integrity that you Dueling Barstools readers find familiar in someone like Gary Johnson; very real, down-to-earth, and an affinity for integrity, despite the cutthroat nature of the music industry.

After completing the first Control Denied album in 1999 (after putting Death on hold in 1998), Chuck began to feel a sharp pain in his neck. It turned out to be a rare form of brain stem cancer. He underwent surgery and radiation therapy, and eventually regained health and began writing and recording for the second Control Denied album. He recorded all of his guitar parts, as well as Richard Christy’s drum parts, before he began to get sick again. This time he did not beat the cancer.

A legal battle ensued between the Schuldiner family and the record label. This lasted up until about a year ago, when it was announced that Relapse Records was to pick up the completion of the second Control Denied album, as well as reissue classic Death and Control Denied material and merchandise. So far, Control Denied’s The Fragile Art of Existence has been reissued in deluxe 2CD/3CD editions, and the entire Death catalog is available on iTunes for the first time.

Please take the time to check out Death and Control Denied. If you’re into more brutal metal, I suggest you check out Death’s Scream Bloody Gore, Leprosy, and Spiritual Healing. If you are into more melodic/complex metal, check out Death’s Human, Individual Thought Patterns, Symbolic, The Sound of Perseverance, and Control Denied’s The Fragile Art of Existence.

Check out Death on:

Facebook
iTunes

Check out Control Denied on:

Facebook
iTunes
Fragile Art… on Relapse Records

Also check out the Death/Control Denied/Chuck Schuldiner official website.

R.I.P. Chuck

*contrary to popular belief, death metal musicians do not hate animals

by Alex Fidel

Yesterday on the radio show we were talking about how the government’s new power to shut down WikiLeaks without due process could expand to them being able to do the same to New York Times, Fox News, and yes, even Dueling Barstools. Otherwise known as mission creep- when something goes beyond its original intentions.

Well guardian.co.uk reports that Senator Lieberman is thinking about punishing New York Times for publishing cables shared by WikiLeaks:

Joe Lieberman, the chair of the Senate homeland security committee, told Fox News: “To me the New York Times has committed at least an act of, at best, bad citizenship, but whether they have committed a crime is a matter of discussion for the justice department.”

Lieberman also said that the department of justice should indict Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, under the 1917 Espionage Act and try to extradite him from the UK. Asked why this had not happened, Lieberman admitted there was probably an argument going on over how to charge Assange.

Not only is the power expanding, unlike certain people said wouldn’t happen because ‘WikiLeaks isn’t a news organization,’ but they are using the 1917 Espionage Act, a highly unconstitutional act put into place under the Woodrow Wilson administration. If you know anything about Wilson, he was a progressive and hated the Constitution. The Espionage Act locked up many Americans simply for speaking out against World War I.

Julian Assange is being treated like a terrorist, and it does not look like he will get proper due process, and Senator Lieberman can’t even think of how to charge him.

Say goodbye to the first amendment.

by Alex Fidel

Download a podcast of the episode here in case you missed it. Once again we had another weekly installment of our new segment, Dueling Barstools.com On Air, where Ryan and I talked about WikiLeaks, the Teapot Party, private property, and the Fed. And of course excellent music throughout.

by Alex Fidel

Download the full episode here.

We introduced our new segment, DuelingBarstools.com On-Air, as well as payed tribute to Leslie Nielsen, and played Frank Zappa’s Apostrophe (‘) album from front to back in honor of FZ’s would-be 70th birthday (Dweezil Zappa is playing Apostrophe from front to back in his current Zappa Plays Zappa tour).

DuelingBarstools.com On-Air will be a weekly segment appearing on the show, which airs every Tuesday at 8PM-10PM PST, only at www.ksunradio.com

We went on for an hour this episode, but we’re going to cut the time down to about 20 minutes going forward.

Add the Freethought Facebook page, too.

by Alex Fidel

Although this will probably never happen, I think John Dennis should be Gary Johnson’s VP choice if he wins the primary.

They are both entrepreneurs; they are both very down-to-earth and humble; they both get much support from independents and Democrats (I was phonebanking for John Dennis’ congressional bid, and one person said they supported him because Pelosi wasn’t left enough, that they voted for Cindy Sheehan in ‘08 and now Dennis in ‘10); they both got massive support from Ron Paul; they both were nationally recognized; they have a great understanding of the philosophy of liberty and are not zombies; and it would break the mold of the image of a typical Republican being a square with a stick up their butt (they have grey hair, but aren’t your typical ‘old geezers’).

How that would work practically against Obama beats me. It could suck away a lot of his disenfranchised constituency who want real anti-war and socially tolerant candidates, but the whole capitalism thing might hinder that effect. What ever the result, I think that they would be a good ticket because of their similarities, which hopefully amounts to less argumentation in the White House.

by Alex Fidel

I am 30,000 ft in the air as I type this on Virgin America/Google Chrome-powered free WiFi (ahh free market innovation, I love it). But in order to enjoy this innovation in customer service, I had to go through a body scanner. This isn’t the first time I’ve been through one, and certainly not the first time I’ve been outraged by it. The first time I went through one I said ‘big brother, eh?’ This time is different, because I’ve had a bit more time to ponder, as well as all the recent events making me even more outraged.

As I pulled into SFO, I began to think about the argument that the TSA workers just want a job and that they’re just following orders. The Nazis followed orders, too. Now I know what you’re thinking, I’m crazy. My reasoning is that they are doing something so grotesque as to molest people, including children, against their will without standing up or quitting is akin to the Nazis ‘just following orders.’ I do not identify myself with the crazies that call our troops Nazis. Yes, there are some atrocities committed, as revealed by various WikiLeaks documents, but it is nowhere near the level of the Nazis. It is perfectly excusable for the troops to use the ‘following orders’ excuse; they aren’t committing major atrocities. Our politicians are the ones to blame in that realm.

Then as I went up to the security checkpoint, I saw a metal detector and a body scanner. I felt a sigh of relief, that they were sending people through the metal detectors. WRONG, WRONG! The TSA workers arbitrarily put people through either the metal detector or the scanner. The guy in front of me got to go through the metal detector, while I went through the scanner. Arbitration is a characteristic of totalitarian governments; rule of law is one of limited governments.

I really was about to burst into tears as I went through. I felt like a prisoner. I was treated with no respect; like cattle. As I left I had to stand in place as the other person went through, then I was cleared to leave. As I left, I tried to be all badass and chant ‘fuck tha police’ (like the N.W.A. song) but it came out really bad so I stormed off and got breakfast.

I didn’t expect to get that shook up, but this is one brick in the road to serfdom. I don’t think it’s that far-fetched to compare TSA workers to Nazis just following orders, though while still hideous, sexual molestation doesn’t come close to genocide. Nazis were definitely worse.

Fuck tha police, and by police, I mean the TSA.

*Side note: Please don’t compare me to Alex Jones for using the word ‘prisoner,’ ‘cattle,’ and referencing facist regimes. I don’t particularly like Alex Jones; I’m not talking conspiracy stuff here.
Oh and props to Virgin for having a good Frank Zappa collection in their music player.

by Alex Fidel

Many presidents in our history have talked about balancing our budget and cutting spending, including even FDR in his first race against President Hoover.

But the walk never matched the talk. Continuously budgets rose, administration after administration. A few like Coolidge cut back a lot, but the trend is there. The talk remained the same, but once in office everyone flipped flopped to some degree, including Reagan. No modern president has ever cut spending in a serious way.

Will anyone ever mean what they say in this area? I say yes. And his name is Gary Johnson.
Will we get the ideal? Maybe, maybe not. There’s a lot to scale back, and government growth will drop. But when that will sum up to a balanced budget depends on the annual rate of decrease in spending. It depends how much Congress is willing to co-operate on scaling back. They’d have to scale back by at least 43% of the budget and sustain and expand upon those cuts annually.

by Alex Fidel

Do I need to say anything except for Jesus effing Christ! (and are the U.S. taxpayers going to be pitching in?)

by Alex Fidel

I figure I aught to suggest some classic albums to DuelingBarstools readers, because it is apparent that I am a metal fan. Now, this isn’t your conventional metal. A lot of it is very abstract and weird. I’m into a lot of jazz, like Mahavishnu, Holdsworth, and Weather Report so that might be why a lot of it is quite ‘out there.’ (I’ll post my top 10 jazz/fusion list soon…)

1. Cynic- Focus

2. Death- Individual Thought Patterns

3. Control Denied- The Fragile Art of Existence

4. Atheist- Unquestionable Presence

5. Death- The Sound of Perseverance

6. Watchtower- Control and Resistance

7. Cynic- Traced in Air

8. King Diamond- Abigail

9. Toxik- Think This

10. Pestilence- Spheres

by Alex Fidel

New York is officially on the ban Four Lokos bandwagon:

Yesterday New York joined the Four Loko Four, the states (Michigan, Oklahoma, Washington, and Utah) that have banned caffeinated malt beverages. Sort of. Under pressure from Gov. David Paterson and the New York State Liquor Authority, Four Loko’s Chicago-based manufacturer, Phusion Products, has “agreed” to stop shipping the drink to New York.

Where was I when the other 3 states came along? There being more states banning Four Lokos than just Michigan is news to me (except for Utah… I can expect that).

On the surface, this seems like a petty thing to weep about, but it is another layer of asphalt on the road to serfdom. Each layer should be treated with equal importance, no matter whether it affects you or not. The element of ‘mission creep’ in laws and power grabs will eventually make something like this affect your liberties.

Every alcoholic beverage is “potentially hazardous,” and none will ever be proven “safe,” if by that Rosen means risk-free. But there’s no question that a can of Four Loko, which has less alcohol than a bottle of wine and about as much caffeine as a cup of coffee, can be consumed without serious adverse effects. If every alcoholic beverage had to pass the reckless college student test, they all would be banned.

While he might be joking about all alcoholic beverages being banned on a “potential hazard” basis, I wouldn’t put it past some politicians. There should be no exceptions for liberty, for liberty is like Jenga- you can only take away so many liberties until it completely topples over.

by Alex Fidel

The fundamental problem with most discriminatory laws is that their foundations are in group rights, otherwise known as ‘collectivism.’

Laws based on collectivism have no baseline rule of law; rights are given arbitrarily based on what group you belong to (i.e. groups based on race, color, religion, sexual preference, income, political views, etc.). This also implies that rights come from men, which is clearly not the case. Rights come from our existence as humans, and are not delegated by the will of any man. Collectivism implies that an authority exists to designate which rights you have (most of which have nothing to do with freedom). Without a baseline rule of law, the tyranny of the majority generally decides what rights certain groups of people can have. Examples include Soviet Russia (groups based on income and political views) or the Jim Crow South (groups based on race/color).

Individual rights have a baseline rule of law, such as the freedom of speech or the right to contract, which applies to all humans equally, regardless of what group you belong to. It also gives authority the purpose of protecting these rights, not designating them. It cannot take them away, because the rights exist whether there is a charter for them or not. You have rights, because you exist as a human. You can’t have more or less rights based on some group you belong to. Examples include United States (which was perfected when slavery was abolished and the 14th Amendment insured equal protection).

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is a law based on group rights. It tells individual humans they have different rights because they are homosexual, and anyone with a brain knows that homosexuality is not a choice. It does not meticulously judge each individual person by their merit and ability to perform various tasks necessary to their employment condition. You could have a gay Rambo and he’d be denied.

If the military were a 100% private entity, this would not be the case, because anyone can go to another firm looking for a job (would you want to work for a homophobe anyways?). But since this is the case of government, and government has a legal monopoly on force, they aren’t supposed to discriminate based on some group you may or may not belong to.

DADT restricts speech for only certain people who belong to an arbitrary group. I could openly say I’m a libertarian, and that could irk someone who doesn’t like libertarians. But free speech protects offensive speech, as long as it is not accompanied by violence. If anything, homophobes (or libertyphobes) should recieve penalties based on merit, because they’d be straying from the task at hand which is a term of their employment. Now if they were penalized for being homophobes, that’d be wrong; freedom is a two-way street, as long as there is no violence. Now if a gay member of the military was to sexually harass someone, that should be penalized in the same way if a straight guy were to harass a female member of the military (and vice-versa). Individual rights and equal protection also implies that punishment shouldn’t differ based on groups either (such as politicians getting away with tax evasion).

Haven’t we always been taught that we always don’t end up working with people we don’t like? DADT reverses that age old idea. What if there was a ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy for people who whistle abnoxiously when not doing important work-related tasks (such as during lunch or in the parking lot), and talked about his hobby of whistling openly to some people? In any private sector job, it would be stupid to report that to your boss. You should ignore it and focus on your job is what he or she would say. But in the military, what you do in your private life and choose to express to people (in whatever context) could get you fired, simply because some other member can’t get over an arbitrary fact and focus on their job. I think people’s rational self-interest will take over and realize if they focus on such absurd things like the sexual orientation of their colleagues, that it will endanger them in the battlefield. I think they’d be more concerned with staying alive on the battlefield.

Besides, does being gay automatically make you a sexual abuser? That logic seems absurd. If someone does, they (once again) shouldn’t be punished for the gay part, they should be punished for the fact that they initiated force upon another individual, same as if a guy did it to a girl.

Your probably thinking ‘why should Alex care about DADT, because it won’t affect him.’ True, true. It won’t affect me, because I’m straight and will never ever join the military (not even for draft). But I care because 1) I’m not selfish and 2) I can better protect my own individual liberties by protecting others’. Here’s a few examples: when Woodrow Wilson instituted the income tax, the promise was that only the rich would pay taxes, and even then it wouldn’t be that high. At the end of his presidency everyone was paying taxes (and a lot of them, too). By putting people into groups and deciding who does or does not have property rights, you leave it up to man to make decisions. The Founding Fathers understood that men are flawed, so you need to limit their power, and protect the basic rights of the individual. This is known as mission creep.

It can also work in the way where one guy can legislate collectivism from a faith-based way. People of faith will think it’s OK because it doesn’t affect them. But their guy won’t be in power forever, and the next guy will have that power structure to implement anti-faith laws. Both sides would be wrong; the authority should stay out of faith one way or the other.

Same works for DADT. Woodrow Wilson segregated the military based on skin color. The power structure implied by DADT could easily make way for a re-segregation of the military if the wrong guy got a policy making position. And be weary of the ‘common good’ argument that is made, a lot of bad things are done in the name of the ‘common good,’ no matter how well-intended. Getting rid of DADT would limit the power of the government to make policy based on groups, which would prevent the chances of such an injustice like racial segregation from happening in the military again.

We should really think twice about how it might eventually affect us if we support policy that affects people in different groups. We should support protection of individual rights, not arbitrarily designating ‘rights’ based on groups.

I think Ron Paul puts it best when he says–paraphrasing–”individual rights are the biggest enemy to racism.” It is true. Racism is a form of collectivism/group judgement, which is the antithesis to liberty.

So let’s repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ and stop legislating people into groups. Rather, judge people based on the content of their character. And all this coming from a straight guy who wouldn’t even join the military in a time of draft, let alone volunteer.

“You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.”
-Barry Goldwater*

*Harvey Milk supported Barry Goldwater for president in 1964

by Alex Fidel

I’m a huge Gary Johnson fan. I’m the opposite when it comes to Alex Jones; I can’t stand the guy. Gary Johnson was on Alex Jones’ show recently, and basically made Gary Johnson read his looney conspiracy headlines, to make it seem as if Gary believed it. Alex would go on and on about conspiracy, and then asked Gary if he was outraged by things like body scanners or the Patriot Act. Gary would answer that he was outraged, but Jones’ rant makes it seem as if the two are interconnected.

Neither Gary Johnson nor Ron Paul believes in Jones’ ‘inside job’ insanity. They believe our militarism causes attacks inflicted upon us, and that they are unintended consequences. The whole basis of libertarianism and libertarian economics is that policies have unintended consequences. In my first post here, I went on a rant about the many holes in the logic of such looney conspiracy theorists:

I’m not a fan of Alex Jones, so it gets a little frustrating when the small handful of people that show up to liberty meetings rapidly turn it into the First Church of Alex Jones. I mean really, if the whole point of libertarianism is that our militarism creates the unintended consequences of terrorism, how can these ‘truthers’ be against our military industrial complex when they think the government ’staged’ 9/11? It doesn’t make any sense. Furthermore, if our government was able to stage the 9/11 attacks, why can’t they properly run Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, Amtrak, USPS, or the DMV? They can’t do anything right; they couldn’t even do ‘Watergate’ right. There is no government conspiracy in 9/11. It was an unintended consequence of our miltary expansion. (If they were efficient enough to do all those things, why cut government? That is the big hole in their logic…) Speaking of inefficiency, the whole reason we ignored the intel we had on the hijackers is because we are so incompetent. Judge Napolitano recently did a thing on FreedomWatch where he exposed the 9/11 commissions’ attempt to cover up their incompetence prior to 9/11, not their involvement. Enough of my anti-conspiracy rant… I’m just tired of seeing infowars ‘inside job’ stuff everywhere. BUT I would never want them to shut up about it, in fact, they should speak louder, because we live in a marketplace of ideas, so as long as we speak non-violently, it’s all good.

‘Nuff said. Gary Johnson is a level-headed, rational thinker. Why reduce our military industrial complex and military presence if our government staged 9/11? Well, they didn’t stage 9/11, our military presence around the world fed the motivation for these religious wackos in the Middle East, and thus, we should remove our military from all these places.

But in spite of all this, I still support Alex Jones’ right to speak, in fact, I think he should speak louder. Even if I think it’s all insane. That’s the beauty of Americanism: the free marketplace of ideas; the good,  the bad, and the wacko.

by Alex Fidel

Reason reports that Michigan recently banned Four Lokos:

Yesterday the Michigan Liquor Control Commission banned caffeinated alcoholic beverages such as Four Loko, Joose, and Smirnoff Raw Tea. The ban gives retailers a month to get rid of 55 products the commission calls “alcohol energy drinks.” The complete list is here (PDF). The State News reports that “the commission decided to ban the [products] because of multiple recent news reports about the dangers and consequences of the drinks.” Behold the power of yellow (or, in this case, maybe lime green) journalism! In addition to the over-the-top ABC piece I noted last week (which implied that healthy young men are dropping dead from heart attacks after their first can of Four Loko), the prohibitionist advocacy disguised as news reporting has included a front-page New York Times story headlined “Caffeine and Alcohol Drink Is Potent Mix for Young.” … “Michigan’s liquor regulators explain that they have the authority to arbitrarily prohibit these products because … They say products like Four Loko (which are classified as beer because their alcohol comes from fermented malt) are intolerable because “the packaging is often misleading” and “the products themselves can pose problems by directly appealing to a younger customer [and] encouraging excessive consumption, while mixing alcohol with various other chemical and herbal stimulants.” They cite no real evidence to support these conclusions, and I’m not sure we should take the word of liquor regulators who think alcohol is a stimulant.

So, Michigan has a Liquor Control Commission (sounds like something out of 1984). Now I could have sworn my dad emigrated from the Soviet Union to escape Orwellian society, but I digress. They have effectively banned all caffeinated alcohol drinks like Four Loko, Joose, etc. I recently ranted about saving Four Lokos from bans here.

Come on you guys, you know California is next. San Francisco just banned Happy Meals. What’s going to stop them from banning Happiness in a Can? Let’s stand behind Four Lokos, even if you think they are nasty.

by Alex Fidel

My congressman, Brian Bilbray, has been sending me mailers throughout the election ever since I re-registered Republican so I can vote in the presidential primaries. He talks about reigning in reckless borrowing and spending. Uh-huh, sure. On his Facebook page, we have 4 likes in common! Wow! The US Constitution, Fox News, Fox Business, and Glenn Beck. It’s like he understands me! He’s a true fiscal conservative and we need to keep him in Congress… right?

Well not so much. I’m guessing that he liked Glenn Beck and the Constitution on Facebook just to pander to this strange, new-fangled Tea Party thing, but I’m guessing he doesn’t know that Glenn Beck espouses for defense spending cuts (and if you watch YouTube videos, people will splice videos out of context and with no chronological progression that it makes Beck seem like he flip-flops on the issue, which is not so. We both started progressing out of neoconservatism at about the same time, around late 2008, so I don’t consider him a ‘fake’ libertarian. It’s Sarah Palin that’s the real phony here), and I’m also guessing he doesn’t know that the Congress has to declare a war, not give the president a blank check for power. And that Fox News has been hiring more libertarians lately, like Stossel and the Judge.

So what else might show the contrary to his ‘fiscal conservatism’? Well, welcome to the first installment of BilbrayWatch!

Let me take you to his Facebook page, where he supports subsidies for scientific research. He uses the ‘general welfare’ quote from the Constitution to make an exception to his ‘fiscal conservatism’ (the videos are there on his wall… go look!). Sounds like bringing home the bacon to me. If he really cared about biomedical research, he would end all subsidies, and limit the power of the FDA (such as making it a voluntary program). Subsidies take money from the private sector and shift it to government cronies and scam artists (like T. Boone Pickins… who got called a scam artist on Stossel), who lobby for the bacon. It artificially picks winners and losers in the marketplace, instead of letting the marketplace pick the winners and losers. It also creates moral hazard. The subsidies really don’t depend on success of research, they just keep getting more government cheese, so they have no incentive to create safe and effective treatment in a timely manner and at a low cost. They can just milk their time and not care about safety or efficacy, because if the product fails and their profits go belly-up, there’s still the bacon to fall back on.

So Brian Bilbray is not a fiscal conservative, and is also not a free-marketeer.

I am also calling on you, DuelingBarstools readers, to help me find a Republican opponent to Bilbray in 2012. Someone like Gary Johnson or John Dennis: knows their philosophies inside an out (as opposed to a zombie… and there are plenty of those in every viewpoint, even libertarians), is 100% honest and that shows in their character and how they present themselves, and actually puts forth effort into their campaigns (especially with the whole Prop 14 deal). Now I am never ashamed to vote for the Libertarian ticket, but it seems like half of these guys don’t even try to campaign, even with lack of financial resources, and frankly, when they speak, they don’t address the issues fluently, namely, they sound like zombies a lot of the time who have never challenged their ways of thought. I used to be a huge neoconservative, and I had to challenge myself every which way as libertarianism resonated so much more with me. In that sense, I can thoroughly explain to a Tea Party crowd who are still soul-searching as to why we need to cut defense spending, legalize drugs, and repeal marriage licenses, and I would go at it from their perspective. Unfortunately, there is no Republican Liberty Caucus to tap, and I don’t want to try and sift through the San Diego Tea Party, because, like I said, they’re still soul-searching. It was easy for me because I’m naturally a rational skeptic, and I’m young. It’s a much longer process for people who have been used to the social conservative dogma for so long, that they don’t really realize that a balanced budget won’t be a reality until we abolish Social Security/Medicaid/Medicare, abolish the Dept. of Education, abolish the Dept. of Homeland Security, abolish the Dept. of Energy, cut defense spending, decriminalize all drug use at the federal level, stop the pork, stop the bailouts, and reject Keynesianism. But I am hopeful, I see Ron Paul books on the same list as Glenn Beck books on Tea Party groups’ reading lists on Amazon (Glenn’s new book, Broke, has an entire chapter on defense cuts). Hopefully they get around in time for Gary Johnson’s presidential primary. And they need to stop picking crazy social conservatives like O’Donnell, Paladino, etc. Other Tea Parties picked Rand Paul and Peter Schiff. Anyways, aside from convincing someone to oppose Bilbray as a Republican and maybe giving policy advice, I’m not gonna be a huge activist for this, because frankly, I want to focus on my music and also save my political energy for Gary Johnson and another Prop 19 in 2012.

Maybe they should also watch this video from time to time:

by Alex Fidel

I think the PMRC and music censorship brought the U.S. to the edge of Communism in the non-economic/social realm, and it was lead by right-wingers. Glenn Beck often points out that progressivism (a.k.a. big government-ism) is prevalent in both the left and the right; progressive/big government left and right. None can be more true of the so-called ‘right’ of the 1980’s.
As a musician and a big Zappa fan, you can see where my disgust comes from. My dad got into bad terms with the KGB when he lived in the Soviet Union for having albums of non-approved artists. Doesn’t sound too far fetched from what the PMRC was trying to accomplish, huh?

Not to mention that the board was made up of the unelected wives of Senators, including both Al and Tipper Gore.

by Alex Fidel

Take my advice with a grain of salt, but these are truly great movies. They may not be the best produced (although they are wonderfully done if you ever hear how much they are made for), but they make it up with the best gore, and also great writing (which is completely lacking from all modern horrors). These are mostly Italian directors’ movies from the 70’s and 80’s.

1. Suspiria

2. The Beyond

3. Zombie

4. Deep Red

5. Pieces

6. Horror Rises From the Tomb

7. Maniac

8. Cannibal Ferox

9. Tenebre

10. Phenomena

There are 2 great DVD companies that puts those types movies out: Grindhouse Releasing, which is owned by Sylvester Stallone’s son Sage, and Blue Underground.

by Alex Fidel

John Dennis interview

by Alex Fidel

http://reason.com/blog/2010/10/25/have-a-drink-have-a-heart-atta

So the FDA is cracking down on manufacturers of drinks like the Four Loko. The proof is there that the ‘danger’ is overhyped; that it is not Four Lokos that are the problem, it is the people that choose to overconsume them.

Besides, laws don’t stop stupidity, and people do the same things on normal alcoholic beverages. Four Lokos are a scapegoat.

If banning is put on the table as an option by the FDA, we must voice our opinions loud and proud (and peacefully). And this is not just because I like Lokos… this is about principle, damn it!

Besides, do you want to see these guys cry?:

Also, join the cause on Facebook: 1,000,000 Strong for Four Loko

by Alex Fidel

My representative Brian Bilbray (R, CA-50) and his staff have been calling my house ever since I re-registered as a Republican so I can vote for Gary Johnson or Ron Paul in 2012. I got a mailer too:

“Bigger government and higher taxes out of Washington aren’t the answer … Cut reckless Washington borrowing and spending.”

Really? Does he really think that is believable? My intelligence has been deeply insulted. If he wants to stop reckless borrowing and spending, maybe try ending all current wars, reducing our military presence around the world, ending the war on drugs, and eliminating needless and wasteful agencies and departments. Well that’s too bad, because it seems as if he’s in favor of all those things.

Since I am so offended (I generally mean that in a pompous, sarcastic way…), I am going to personally see to it that he has a Tea Party opponent in the 2012 Republican primary (from the Ron Paul/libertarian side of the Tea Party, not the Palin/Gingrich side). I was surprised he was unopposed this year.

OH WAIT! I forgot, thanks to Prop 14, there are no more primaries…

by Alex Fidel

Gary Johnson interview

It’s about 10 minutes in… unless you like gnarly technical progressive metal, then you can start from the beginning B-)

The Jackass 3D D-box ticket giveaway goes on until next week (Oct. 26th). Works for CinemaWest theaters only, the one we went to is in Petaluma, CA in Sonoma county.

My name is Alex Fidel. I am 19 years old and attend Sonoma State University as a business major, but I am an [Austrian] econ buff and host my own radio show called Freethought Radio every Tuesday from 8-10PM PST at www.ksunradio.com

My show is mostly music, I am a big metal fan and also a huge jazz-fusion fan. But occasionally I like to shove my libertarian leanings down everyone’s throats, so I will have Gary Johnson on the show October 19th, John Dennis on October 26th, and a mesh between Halloween and the election results on November 2nd.

So I am a libertarian, it’s no secret. I believe in individual rights, that laws should apply equally to all people, and laws like gay marriage bans, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and politicians being able to get away with being tax cheats are totally against individual rights and equal justice.

I’m not a fan of Alex Jones, so it gets a little frustrating when the small handful of people that show up to liberty meetings rapidly turn it into the First Church of Alex Jones. I mean really, if the whole point of libertarianism is that our militarism creates the unintended consequences of terrorism, how can these ‘truthers’ be against our military industrial complex when they think the government ’staged’ 9/11? It doesn’t make any sense. Furthermore, if our government was able to stage the 9/11 attacks, why can’t they properly run Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, Amtrak, USPS, or the DMV? They can’t do anything right; they couldn’t even do ‘Watergate’ right. There is no government conspiracy in 9/11. It was an unintended consequence of our miltary expansion. (If they were efficient enough to do all those things, why cut government? That is the big hole in their logic…) Speaking of inefficiency, the whole reason we ignored the intel we had on the hijackers is because we are so incompetent. Judge Napolitano recently did a thing on FreedomWatch where he exposed the 9/11 commissions’ attempt to cover up their incompetence prior to 9/11, not their involvement. Enough of my anti-conspiracy rant… I’m just tired of seeing infowars ‘inside job’ stuff everywhere. BUT I would never want them to shut up about it, in fact, they should speak louder, because we live in a marketplace of ideas, so as long as we speak non-violently, it’s all good.

So I’m going to be blogging here about current events. I don’t have direct feeds to sources… I can get off my ass and check AP or Reuters once in a while to check all the stuff, but I usually get my current events from Drudge Report or Reason.com’s Hit and Run blog, because they wade through all the extraneous news info and get to the important things. I’m not going to blog about earthquakes or Jonas Brothers news haha. I might blog about music and movies as well. We’ll see.

Religion is a collective group of people’s conception of the natural order of things. Collectively religions accurately depict the natural order of things. Not because they are trying, however.  In fact, most religions tell believers it will elevate them above the natural order of things, or remake the others in its image in order to restore the rightful state of order.

Consider Judaism. It told a group of people they were more special than the natural order, and proved it by enslaving them in Egypt, bringing them out of Egypt, insulating them from the natural order for forty years, and then reintroduced them to the natural order of things, which is fighting to sustain their collective conception of natural order, which, like many other religions, offer interesting possibilities at what the natural order could be if it were the natural order, which it could be if it implemented its conception of natural order on everyone else.

Rather, religions together accurately depict natural order because the global concert of each religion’s actors all acting simultaneously and at once is precisely nature’s order. This is true even of Atheists who collectively function as a single religion. As do Voluntaryists, however non-coercively. And wouldn’t natural order be interesting if people, whom for so long have done nothing but coerce each other, just stopped it already? Then people could get on with figuring out whom they are, and being that person. What I’m saying is the great Greek aphorism – know thyself – is potentially unfulfilled.

Perhaps it requires a moment to understand that natural order is as natural order does. Whatever natural order may be, it always abides by the laws of physics, markets, and providence. So what all religions – and cultures, which like any collective group of people trying to achieve their conception of the natural order play a substantial role in shaping the natural order – have in common is a good indicator of what’s true about the human experience. For instance, no religion I’m aware of promises that the rain will fall only on the righteous, because clearly that’s not true. All religions that promise the return of its particular prophet or deity disclaim that the precise date or time is unknown. The exceptions to this all prove the rule, such as the Seventh Day Adventists who were so sure Jesus was returning in 1844 they didn’t bother to bring in the crops that year.

That’s why it’s important to consider how accurately a particular religion depicts the immutable laws by which all actors in the concert of natural order must obey, such as gravity and probability. Consequently, I’m particularly tolerant of religions that articulate and are consistent with the natural rights (see Locke, John; Hobbes, Thomas) that shape my conception of the natural order, which is freedom. I suppose that explains a lot about why some people think man made God in man’s image.

For instance, if God was made in my image he’d love freedom, hate coercion, but be a bit of a fatalist, being a big believer in providence and that the best we can do is to do the best we can. Of course, you can say the same of gazelles on African savannah.

Nature, then, provides the natural order with which the human experience is ultimately consistent. The obvious implication is that humans evolved directly from nature, which is scientifically true. Yet common to almost every human is belief in God or religion, befuddling Atheists. Perhaps gazelles marvel at the stars, thanking providence for sparing them from the day’s lions. That doesn’t account beyond nature’s order, however, for the gazelles the lions ate.

The fact is that natural life is short and brutal. Since humans are uniquely capable of attempting to recreate natural order in their conception of what natural order should be it should be no surprise that humans endeavor precisely that. Perhaps left to our own devices in a world devoid of government or religion – like in The Book of Eli, where the natural order of humankind was truly short and brutal – religion would be a most logical conclusion, as a preferable alternative to nature’s brute order. The logical end of that, though, is the same concert of religions, cultures, and individuals, as exist now, all fighting, one way or another, to assert their conception of natural order upon others. The common human experience, then, may be cyclical and never learns from its mistakes, something to which most religions stipulate. As does Cosmology (universe expanding, contracting, and over again).

If in a world devoid of government or religion life is short and brutal, rather than libertopia, one wonders how voluntaryism might take hold if not by force. Consider Ghengis Khan, the original neocon, who sincerely believed the only way to live at peace was to conquer potentially (and often actually) quarrelsome neighbors, and enforce a culture of peace with the hardest of iron fists – which he did. His only mandate to all within his ever-expanding territory was be peaceful. But it took many millions of lives to achieve that peace, and it lasted only as long as he could enforce it. George Bush might say that Khan violated his peaceful principles to implement his peaceful principles. Successfully, too, for a time.

Then again, hundreds of millions of lives have been wasted throughout history for reasons much less noble than creating a culture of relative peace. As a result I’m often convinced that neoconism is the lesser of the evils. The obvious counterargument to neoconism is that Alfred Nobel thought dynamite – his invention and at that time the world’s greatest weapon – would end large-scale warfare. And look how well that turned out. But as a friend pointed out the other day, Nobel may have actually been correct in principle, and his flaw one of scale. Perhaps hydrogen bombs are weapons great enough in global scale to end large-scale warfare, making irritating regional conflicts the norm rather than greater global upheaval.

Of course, regional conflicts involving nuclear weapons may quickly progress to global upheaval, which makes the neoconservative point about the importance of stopping unstable regimes such as Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. By contrast, neoconservatives tolerate Israel’s nuclear arsenal because they don’t think it’d be used for anything but self-preservation. Self-preservation is a natural right, and one superior to the right of coercion asserted by every invader – even those who claim the right of invasion to create a peaceful order. Human’s collective appreciation for the right of self-preservation may be precisely why implementing an aggressive neoconservative strategy effectively frightens the majority of us into inaction on the matter, leading then to the proliferation of nuclear weapons in unstable regions (e.g. Pakistan), the presence of which makes more likely the prospect of global warfare, which is ultimately much worse than irritating regional conflicts.

Worse, not only are we collectively unwilling to preclude the possibility of global warfare by forcibly stopping unstable regimes from obtaining nuclear weapons, we are unwilling even to destabilize those regimes by tearing down the restrictions on nuclear energy in the United States – ironically, the form of energy powering the Navy, our greatest projection of power – and instantly bankrupt unstable and unwanted regimes the world over. The mass proliferation of nuclear energy in America would reduce regional conflicts into simply national conflicts. Or at least nations in a given region couldn’t project their regional conflicts onto us, which would be outstanding.

So do we agree, then, on supporting nuclear energy? And did I mention Gov. Gary Johnson supports bustin’ down the door to nuclear energy in America? I’m on board.