Recent comments

  • JoshuaPettigrew's picture
    JoshuaPettigrew 8 years 45 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    From the poll: 33. Do you think Iran currently has nuclear weapons, or not? Feb. 12-15 2010 Yes, has weapons 71% No, does not 26% No opinion 3% This was based on about 500 interviews. I hope it does not reflect reality.
  • Guest's picture
    patpetrilloartist (not verified) 8 years 45 weeks ago
    Wheat and Chaff
    Page Bill Butler
    Thanks for the info, I'm doing research about this one. You helped me, thanks again. Mr. Petrillo MMA Pound for Pound
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 8 years 45 weeks ago Page Alex Schroeder
    Nicely done column; gets to the root of things. The power elite are thrilled to have people on the "left" and "right" jockeying for a chance to add their own favored tyranny to the mix; when the voters tire of the current party in power and put the opposite wing in charge, the new "leaders" begin adding "their side's" desired tyrannies WITHOUT dismantling the tyranny added by the previous crowd, despite campaign promises. This ratchet effect ensures that government power grows reliably, year after year. Smoking bans, as Alex points out, are just one example of the process.
  • Guest's picture
    clore333 (not verified) 8 years 46 weeks ago Page Alex Schroeder
    I would have appreciated this justified attack on eminent domain much more if the author hadn't engaged in shilling for corporations like McDonald's and Wal-Mart. The latter is a particularly egregious example to cite, as a study has shown that this corporate welfare queen has received more than one billion dollars in state subsidies, often via abuse of eminent domain. News & Views for Anarchists & Activists: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo/
  • Plant Immigration Rights Supporter's picture
    Plant Immigrati... 8 years 46 weeks ago Web link Little Alex
    I wonder if Congress will ever get around to passing a similar resolution regarding the Holodomor, the muder of more than 10 million Ukrainians by Stalin.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 8 years 46 weeks ago Page Alex Schroeder
    This highlights the inherent weakness of positive law that ignores individual human rights. No matter its original intent (and that can always be argued), its subsequent interpretation can only be detrimental to human freedom. Yeah, let's all get back to that Constitution, wherein it is stated that the government controls all the land and private property does not exist. That's a fine foundation for a free society.
  • ReverendDraco's picture
    ReverendDraco 8 years 46 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    Glad to see STR is back. . . the first time I hit the site after it went down, my Anti-Virus alerted me. . . so nice that all wasn't lost. STR is the first site I hit in the morning, it goes great with the first cup o'mud and a cig. You guys rock.
  • buzaman's picture
    buzaman 8 years 46 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    Welcome back STR! I was checking 4-5 times a day waiting for the site to come back up. A good friend is back!
  • GregL's picture
    GregL 8 years 46 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    Me too. STR was always the first site I looked at in the morning. Welcome back.
  • elee3's picture
    elee3 8 years 46 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    Agreed, I'm very happy to see STR back online. I must have checked the site 20 times a day for the last week.
  • Plant Immigration Rights Supporter's picture
    Plant Immigrati... 8 years 46 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    I was very concerned when you were down due to the virus. I am glad to know that the world has not lost a great friend of human liberty. Welcome Back.
  • Guest's picture
    ex0du5 (not verified) 8 years 48 weeks ago Page David Graham
    How can you logically argue for animal rights in one breath, and in the same breath mock health care rights? Or, put differently, at what size of organism does the right to _defense_ end? We can build a defensive military and police to protect the right (to defend health) of humans against humans, and maybe against some wildlife, but when it gets microscopic, suddenly it's absurd? What about Steve McQueen's blob? If it came rolling down the street, but it was determined it was unicellular, does that mean everyone it's consuming would have to pay for their own defense? What about an alien invasion? I think the health care debate is one where libertarian thinkers have failed miserably to have any coherence, for precisely the same reasons presented here for animal rights. All enlightenment arguments for classical liberalism are ultimately health based...
  • wkmac's picture
    wkmac 8 years 48 weeks ago Web link Robert Fredericks
    As I read in the article about Valentine's Day being a christian holiday based on reverence to a so-called christian saint, I couldn't help but think of Plato and the Noble Lie observed in it's modern form in the Straussians and the various religionist movements that grip people in subjugation, mentally as well as physical and political. To make matters worse are how these religions so clearly and continuously violate real ethics and morals while uttering the noble lie that in all of heaven and earth, they are the sole source for all morality, ethics and worst of all, truth. On this day of myth and purpose of filthy lucer, I'm hard pressed to think of who is the more unwise, the Saudi's who follow our lead or our own western culture who continue to stick their heads in holes and refuse to stand like the free individuals they should be and were intended to be. Thanks Robert for posting the article.
  • Evan's picture
    Evan 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Thumbs up.
  • Evan's picture
    Evan 8 years 49 weeks ago
    Streetzen
    Web link Don Stacy
    lol
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 8 years 49 weeks ago
    Streetzen
    Web link Don Stacy
    WTF? Hollywood glam shots?
  • Libertas's picture
    Libertas 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Little Alex
    I see it everyday in Honolulu, just in their driving and parking. They can´t seem to understand that the lack of respect from the citizens is due to their lack of respect for the law. Instead they just want us to obey unquestioningly. They are more cowardly than regular bullies because they hide behind the uniform and the state. Walking through downtown Honolulu, I´m more likely to get robbed and insulted for jay walking than mugged or harassed by drug dealers. They at least leave me alone and don´t insult me with the idea that they are protecting me.
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Little Alex
    Now THIS is why I enjoy this site so much. I learn something new every time I visit. I honestly did not realize that Marx was the originator of the word "capitalism." I had a very clear, simple understanding of the word capitalism (one of an accountant, really). But what we find as a core belief...it really isn't the true definition of capitalism, is it? Maybe laissez-faire IS the better term. I've invested some time reading various authors in the subject of economics (mainly because the Keynesian models that were crammed down my throat in business school began to be personally rejected a few years ago), but it seems that I really am at a point where I need to read Marx and understand the origin of some these terms better. I've been dismissive of Marx, always deferring to others on the subject of "Das Kapital." This is a good impetus to pick up a copy and try to work through Marx's text.
  • Little Alex's picture
    Little Alex 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Little Alex
    The question could also be: Why confuse an ethical free market with capitalism. It makes my dick itch when people fixate on semantics in politics, but I try to stick to original meanings as much as possible. The word that always comes to mind as the perfect example is 'liberal'. 'Libertarian' is rooted in egalitarian imperatives, but we work from the prefix, discuss ethics and there's nothing more libertarian that scrutinizing power at all times, so looser usages of 'libertarian' doesn't bother me because libertarians are scrutinizing the ownership of the term. But 'capitalism' has an extremely distinctive meanings from the roots of the word's creation by Karl Marx. I think it was a mistake for classical liberals to equate laissez-faire philosophy with the corporatism Marx was identifying as capitalism. The Misesean definition is the reactionary one -- isolating the definition of 'socialism' to be Bolshevism and 'capitalism' as the opposite of that -- not what Prof. Chartier is discussing.
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Little Alex
    The premise of this speech is interesting and certainly a speech I'd like to hear. However, I finding parsing of language more than just a little annoying, especially in light of how much damage has been done by others redefining conventional definitions. Chartier's simplest definition of capitalism is succinct (if little understood by most) and essentially what makes trade, wealth and true egalitarian prosperity possible for a growing majority of the population. Why confuse capitalism with corporatism?
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Little Alex
    An excellent critique.
  • Wilton D. Alston's picture
    Wilton D. Alston 8 years 49 weeks ago
    Importing Freedom
    Page Stefan Molyneux
    This is an essay that was actually co-authored by Stef and me, Wilt Alston. For reasons having to do with the hosting platform, it does not (and cannot, apparently) show me as a co-author. Simply because I'm proud of the work that Stef and I did together, I will spell that fact out here in the comments.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Cheryl Cline
    Very informative. Where is the line to be drawn between running down a libeler in order to bring them to court and the persecution of a troll? Hard to say.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Anthony Gregory
    Okay what about throat and lung cancer then? It's safer to ingest it with food.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 8 years 49 weeks ago
    Only Cowards Vote
    Page Per Bylund
    I believe tyranny WAS slowed by the vote on Prop 13. Pro-gov groups of all stripes pissed and moaned about it for decades, programs were cut, various proposed increases in spending had to be scrapped, and so on. I don't disagree with you that in the end, the beast just kept on growing. Look at California today! What a mess! But Prop 13 was passed in 1978. It capped property taxes and made it more difficult to raise taxes in other ways (here's the full text of the measure as adopted: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_13A ). Yes, it's been largely overwhelmed, but for a long time it kept the CA tyranny at bay -- slowed it down, at any rate. Don't knock that; real people benefited from more freedom and lower taxes. Just because the CA legislature and various special interests managed to overwhelm the restrictions of Prop 13 and continue wrecking California doesn't mean it didn't benefit millions of people -- and for that matter, it STILL benefits the people of California. Prop 13 is proof -- no question -- that anything which leaves a coercive Power in place is insufficient. So what? Does that mean that an entire generation had to be taxed out of their homes? Prop 13 voters COULD have abstained, because the measure didn't completely end tyranny, but that would have been foolish. Do you really think people should NOT do what they can to fight tyranny? To cut the level of money taken from them by the State, and (inevitably) used to make things worse? It would have been nice if the movement that brought Prop 13 to fruition continued on in a manner that continued cutting down the State in California. But even without that, Prop 13 was a major win for liberty, in the lifetime of those who voted for it. It was, to a large extent, a temporary win, but then life itself is temporary. [Added comment]: That last statement is important: life is temporary. Heck: life is SHORT. You and your family will not be here on this Earth forever. Does it make sense for you, and those you care about, to suffer more tyranny than necessary just because TOTAL FREEDOM is not yet available? Would you stay in a filthy cell in the Gulag forever just because getting OUT of the Gulag wouldn't give you TOTAL freedom? Or does it make sense to oppose tyranny in the ways, and to the extent, that you CAN, in the time you have available on this Earth? I don't oppose anyone who takes the position that only full abolition is acceptable: that's a personal choice. But neither do I oppose those who want to oppose tyranny in the less-than-complete ways available to them that might actually result in an increase in liberty for themselves and those they care about.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 8 years 49 weeks ago
    Only Cowards Vote
    Page Per Bylund
    One might imagine that the property tax increase that was voted down resulted in some other tax increases to make up for the lost expected income. If this was the case, then those who were able to keep their houses did so at the expense of other taxpayers. I don't blame anyone for voting in order to save their home, but this self-defense ballot probably just shifts the burden to others. In such situations, it is no doubt best to take your own interests into account first, but it is still manipulating the system for your benefit, to the detriment of others. If a chunk of the government had to shut down due to lack of funding brought about by the vote, then that is another matter. But I don't believe that happens very often, if at all. Whether through tax increases, new taxes, or inflation, the government seems to always be able to fund its expansion. So I guess that I'm not convinced that tyranny is slowed by any vote, and it will inevitably follow the path it always has—taking until it takes too much and crashes.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 8 years 49 weeks ago
    Only Cowards Vote
    Page Per Bylund
    People have the right to act in ways that might potentially reduce the tyranny they suffer from -- voting for lower taxes, for instance. The Prop 13 example (used in my comment above) is a good one: millions of people were spared dramatic property tax increases; in turn, many got to keep their homes instead of being taxed out of them. The argument that voting for Prop 13 somehow "harmed" liberty in the long run is worth considering, and I do consider it -- but mostly I think it's silly. I do not blame anyone for doing something to IMPROVE the situation for themselves and their families, in a way that does not agress against anyone, IN THEIR OWN LIFETIMES. I'll say it again: if people wait for perfection before acting, if they insist on supporting nothing but an immediate leap to full abolition of all government, then they will live their entire lives under tyranny, and will have thrown away many chances to improve the situation for themselves and for others. Full abolition is the goal; refusing to do anything to reduce tyranny in the meantime does not move us toward the goal and is counter-productive in the short-term for certain, and probably in the long term as well. On slavery, btw -- Britain (among other nations) ended slavery without a civil war, and while it was done by a vote in Parliament instead of by direct vote of the people, voting for anti-slave candidates certainly played a role -- and if the matter HAD been put to a direct vote, and the slaves were freed that way, they'd still have been just as free as after our civil war. Again, I don't see any problems with that. And c'mon: VOTING versus a war with 650,000 dead, millions maimed or wounded, civil liberties ended for the duration, entire cities wrecked, and the Southern states crushed under an added layer of de facto tyranny for decades. Which is the real threat to liberty: a non-aggressive vote to end slavery, or war?
  • Wilton D. Alston's picture
    Wilton D. Alston 8 years 49 weeks ago
    Only Cowards Vote
    Page Per Bylund
    The argument that voting to end slavery justifies voting seems flawed to me for several reasons. The best of which is quite simple: That the outcome preferred by the voters is ostensibly moral does not justify for the methodology itself. It seems you're using the ends to justify the means. Stated differently, if one believes that slavery is wrong, then simply because voting *could* have conceivably ended slavery doesn't make voting good. In fact, the same benefit could be offered for other approaches, e.g., killing all slave owners. Yet few, if any, would suggest that this represents "a rare case where murder is justified." (Then again...) Anyway, the approach I might have used to end slavery, arguably a lifeboat situation for my ancestors, provides little information or useful premise for that multitude of situations outside the lifeboat.
  • winston smith's picture
    winston smith 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    the real link is here --------------> http://www.wcfcourier.com/news/local/article_69966300-1402-11df-b1e3-001...
  • winston smith's picture
    winston smith 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    i real link for the page is ---> http://newsjunkiepost.com/2010/02/06/when-70-support-marijuana-legalizat...
  • ReverendDraco's picture
    ReverendDraco 8 years 49 weeks ago Web link Robert Fredericks
    http://www.examiner.com/x-536-Civil-Liberties-Examiner~y2010m2d2-Arizona... This is the actual link. . . the one labeled "original article" doesn't work.
  • Guest's picture
    Mitchell Callahan (not verified) 8 years 49 weeks ago
    Drunk on Our Money
    Web link Don Stacy
    Thanks for the analogy. It certainly does look as if he is drunk. Cutting back, if it is to really do any good, means really cutting back or stopping completely. American families are tightening our belts and so should the government. casino online
  • kborer's picture
    kborer 8 years 50 weeks ago
    E-Prime and Freedom
    Page Craig Russell
    I imagine that using the principles of E-Prime would improve most people's writing. The following criticism of E-Prime from its Wikipedia article seems to be a good reason to not adhere to E-Prime religiously: A civilization advances when it can move from the idea of individual trees to that of forest. E-Prime tends to make the expression of higher orders of abstraction more difficult, e.g. a student is more likely to be described in E-Prime as "She attends classes at the university".
  • kborer's picture
    kborer 8 years 50 weeks ago Page Craig Russell
    I enjoyed reading this article.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 8 years 50 weeks ago
    Foreword
    Web link Don Stacy
    Ah yes STR's weekly Chomsky. For a look at the real, actual Chomsky of today and not from four decades ago, take a look here: "On the contrary, maintaining such immoral discretion with such perseverance and allowing himself to be photographed besides the Castros and the Chavezes he becomes an accomplice of the clownishness and the authoritarian, dictatorial deviations of these modern day oligarchs, no matter how convenient or discreet his praises might be." From the article Chomsky As Chavez's Clown @ The Anarchist Library
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 8 years 50 weeks ago Page strike
    Dims.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 8 years 50 weeks ago Page strike
    Proselytizing atheists are just as overbearing and domineering as the theists are. Their religious belief is that there is no god. Okay fine, but they cannot prove this belief beyond a fair doubt anymore than the theists can theirs. And good on you for calling them out on that fact too, strike.
  • Guest's picture
    ws (not verified) 8 years 50 weeks ago Page Alex Schroeder
    superb insight ! Surprisingly accurate . WS
  • Guest's picture
    MutualistAdam (not verified) 8 years 50 weeks ago Page strike
    These* not "there"
  • Guest's picture
    MutualistAdam (not verified) 8 years 50 weeks ago Page strike
    I think Max Stirner would have had fun mocking there guys.
  • Guest's picture
    MutualistAdam (not verified) 8 years 50 weeks ago
    Space Corporatism
    Web link Anthony Gregory
    Corporate welfare meets new heights indeed.
  • Guest's picture
    MutualistAdam (not verified) 8 years 50 weeks ago
    Space Corporatism
    Web link Anthony Gregory
    It is an interesting concept, the space taxi, however, I don't really get the point of making it a reality, or even being out there in the first place, besides it just being "cool". Just like the missile that was launched at the moon, I mean, what kind of backwards ass country sends a missile at the moon, yet protests spending money on health care? I'm not in support of involuntary public health care, but if I had to choose between the two programs, I'd ditch NASA quick. Corporate welfare meets new heights indeed.
  • jd-in-georgia's picture
    jd-in-georgia 8 years 50 weeks ago Web link Anthony Gregory
    Like many articles and contributions, this one does as good of a job of defining the problem as any I have read. I pray we come up with a solution before today's children are old enough to fight a war.
  • zrated's picture
    zrated 8 years 50 weeks ago Page Robert L. Johnson
    paul's words were not only contradictory to jesus' words and actions (jim, it's a stretch to say that Christ's words to pilate were an endorsement of the roman empire, as opposed to the idea that God allowed that power in that instance in order for his will to be fulfilled), but they were also contradictory paul's actions and the words and actions of his contemporary, peter, as i pointed out through the link above. i don't think that the bible can be trusted in every case. though Christians believe that the the bible is the word of God, i believe that it contains the word of God, though not necessarily everything it contains represents such. it has spent too much time in the hands of untrustworthy people for us to be assured that it has not been altered for the sake of controlling Christians.
  • winston smith's picture
    winston smith 8 years 50 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    this was in the Houston area too http://www.blog2.tshirt-doctor.com/?p=6029
  • albergine's picture
    albergine 8 years 50 weeks ago
    Valor and Discretion
    Page tzo
    on expecting the approach, i've found that response is dependent on the level of toe curl, the differing degrees of such being dependent on the manner of approach. When late walking (at night) i was asked what i was doing, with minor toe curl responded with 'walking why ?, was told it was late for a walk and responded as to there being 24hrs in a day, end. A friend was pulled in his car, due to eye contact at a junction and him laughing, they were shown his documents, looked over the vehicle etc, then when done were informed of a terrible stink, they said they couldn't smell anything, they were told it was their aftershave, they moved on.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 8 years 50 weeks ago
    Timing Is Everything
    Page Bill Butler
    Sucked up by banks who want to fix their balance sheets instead of loan the dollars? If that's the case, and it works at all to temporarily stabilize the system, then eventually they will lend out with the 10x multiplier. Then we'll see an explosion in dollar supply and prices.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 8 years 50 weeks ago
    Bread and Circuses
    Page Mike Wasdin
    An excellent synopsis in just a few words describing "My Country" (government) and "elections" (the game as it is). Good work. However, your last paragraph, Mike, falls short. Let's see if I can explain: I am a sovereign state. Last time I voted in a U.S. Election was for Barry Goldwater in 1964 (I'm 73). Some time thereafter I seceded from the union. I was not required to move to New Hampshire (or is it Vermont?). I did not need to contemplate floating on a gigantic raft on the ocean. I stayed in Texas -- but I was no longer a Texan or an American. I vote. My President is responsible for the rotation of the earth on its axis. I support The Incumbent. The Laws that govern me can be inscribed upon two tablets of stone. Don't get me wrong -- I fall down in obedience miserably much of the time, but that doesn't change The Statutes or exempt me from The Law. By now you're thinking, "This guy's one of them Eee-Van-Gelical's -- a Borned-Again Chr-stian!!!" (Probably a Huck-Abee fan!). Not. I couldn't proselytize anybody into anything. Well, I had to quit drinking in the process of secession; so I could help you find a group of men and women who will lead you out of that tyranny if it turns out your problem is anything like mine. But no religion and no politics. You can be free. Yes, you can. Samarami
  • Mitrik_Spanner's picture
    Mitrik_Spanner 8 years 50 weeks ago
    Valor and Discretion
    Page tzo
    I was stopped in Utah in my semi-truck on a state highway as it passed through a small town. The police there make a lot of stops as a matter of drug interdiction, the highway in question having proximity and a straight shot to the Mexican border. My truck had been recently repainted and didn't have certain insignia required by law, thus creating a pretext for the stop. That was fine by me; I had paperwork to demonstrate my compliance. The officer wanted to go farther though. He wanted to search my trailer for contraband. I resisted in a respectful way saying that I thought that since my paperwork was in order, I had satisfied the original grounds for the stop and that a search of my trailer went so far as to constitute an unreasonable search based on constitutional grounds. He explained that his work on this stretch of road routinely yielded successful interdictions and forfeitures and that I should cooperate in a spirit of cooperation with the laudable goals of law enforcement. I yielded at that point because I felt I had made a good effort to articulate what should be, realizing that what should be is not what the reality is. I did what I thought I could do and lived on to continue my campaign of trying to undermine the state in a hundred small and not so small ways each and every day.
  • iliad's picture
    iliad 8 years 50 weeks ago
    Valor and Discretion
    Page tzo
    Tzo, Excellent commentary, as usual. There is a thin line between bravery and stupidity. I believe every person's line is different. I had a similar encounter and stood my ground, for a short while. It quickly became obvious to me that I was on the loosing side of the argument, so I decided to comply. Retreat is not a sign of cowardice. Many times it is a sign of intelligence. In my situation the officer's communication, both verbal and non-verbal, told me I was about to receive an attitude adjustment. I decided to comply with his demand for identification and was "allowed" to proceed on my merry way. I stood my ground, but knew when to retreat. I do not feel like a coward, although I do feel as though my freedom was violated. I believe that just knowing that the officer was violating your natural rights puts you ahead of the AAC. That is half of the battle.