Rainbough Phillips's blog

The People's Republic of Capitalism

The past 3 nights Ted Koppel's new 4 part series on China has been airing on Discovery, and in spite of being hosted by one of the driest journalists outside of PBS it is really fascinating. The last episode is airing tonight though the rest of it is definitely worth seeing for those of you with DVR's. I am sure they will be re-airing the series at some point in the near future.

There are too many interesting ideas and comparisons for me to cover here so I will focus on the difference between our countries that jumps out at me the most. They talked to many Americans regarding the exportation of jobs to China, and of course they talked to many Chinese on the same subject.

The Americans were usually (but not always) old, bitchy, set in their ways, and convinced that a company's loyalty to its country of origin was far more important than making a profit. The Chinese, though variable in age, were usually ambitious, optimistic, and mysteriously thought America was a great country that they aspired to be like.

One American lady complained about losing her job at age 50 at which she was making 11 dollars an hour at, and told us it was unfair because she wanted to continue working there for the next 20 years.

Honestly I cannot comprehend this sentiment -that it is somehow "not right" that someone cannot retire at the company/job of their previous employment. Nor can I comprehend why anyone would want to work at the same job for that long. She acted like the most humiliating, disgraceful, and unjust thing imaginable was someone like her having to search for a new job. Meanwhile Koppel was interviewing a Chinese executive at Ford regarding American jobs lost due to Ford moving factories to China.

Koppel seemed to think that it would really upset Americans that Chinese were making American cars and selling them to the Chinese market. It is apparently a popular belief in China that Americans make the best cars in the world. Their brand of choice being Buick with Ford a close second. Of course by "Americans" I mean Chinese workers, in American car factories, on Chinese soil, run by Chinese management.

All I have to say to that is: Y'all can have your American cars, I want my cars Japanese (or perhaps made by Americans in Japanese factories, on American soil...)

Episode 3 focused on car production and consumtion in China, and Koppel kept trying to get the idea across to Chinese executives that nationalism should somehow be important to big businesses. The Chinese Ford executive finally says to him (I'm paraphrasing): But we are not an American company, Ford is a global company. We do business all over the world.

Somehow I don't think Henry Ford would be opposed to this notion.

So while China may not be very capitalistic in the libertarian/free market/limited government sense of the word, they seem to be getting the basic idea far better than we Americans do.


Discrimination, IQ, and Stupidity

I have a co-worker who is best described as having lower than average intelligence. She's not retarded or obviously mentally deficient. It just takes multiple attempts to communicate fairly basic information to her. I bring this up because she seems to be reasonably competent at her job, however in spite of this, there are already rumors and speculations flying about my workplace regarding when and how she is likely to get fired.

This made me start to wonder. While I have heard that it is possible to improve one's IQ (or at least to improve one's score on IQ tests), presumably one does not chose to have a lower than average intelligence to begin with.

So if your intelligence limits your capacity to grasp certain concepts with any reasonable speed, and limits your ability to communicate effectively with co-workers and customers should you be fired for a trait you have no control over, specifically if you can competently do your job?

Generally it is considered to be discrimination to not make reasonable accommodations for someone who has a disability if that disability does not make them incapable of doing their job. Low intelligence kind of strikes me as a disability. Presumably it merely takes longer for a person of low intelligence to learn things than someone with average intelligence. So if the only accommodation necessary is greater patience then surely it would not be ethical to fire such a person.

However in my limited experience with not-so-bright people it seems like they are much more prone to stupidity than the average person. I am operating on the premise that stupidity and low intellect are different things. Of course I have known multiple highly intelligent people who often did stupid things. So I have to assume that having a high IQ is no guarantee that a person will have "common sense" and therefore not do stupid things.

On the other hand if a person has a low enough IQ then their capacity to grasp basic concepts would be more limited, or at least take longer than it would take the average person. Which is why I think people with lower than average intelligence are more prone to stupidity than everyone else.

I worked at McDonald's in high school and I found myself regularly saying "surely that person knows better than to... (dump water in a hot fryer, honk into a drivethru speaker, drive through a narrow drivethru with a boat attached to their vehicle, mix clorox and ammonia etc.)"

The last few weeks at my current job have felt very similar to those high school days. Probably because of my experience at McDonald's I have always felt that stupidity is necessarily a fire-able trait. Specifically because it is too dangerous not to be.

Or as Heinlein put it:

Stupidity cannot be cured with money, or through education, or by legislation. Stupidity is not a sin, the victim can't help being stupid. But stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence is death, there is no appeal, and execution is carried out automatically and without pity.

Low intelligence does not guarantee stupidity either, and the reality is that how patient you can be with a non-stupid-low-intellect person usually is directly relate to how expensive their limitation is. Which is likely how other disabilities would be treated as well if non-discrimination via "reasonable accommodation" were not mandated by law.


Tomato-Crazies

About a week ago the story broke in Texas that around 20 Texans (40 people nationwide) had gotten salmonella. The source of the salmonella outbreak had been linked by the center for disease control to raw large and raw roma tomatoes.

Within about 2 days most of the large chain restaurants in my area had stopped serving fresh tomatoes. This included Olive Garden, Chillis, Mcdonalds, Subway, and even Burger King. Several large grocery stores also pulled fresh tomatoes off of their shelves including Wal-Mart, and Whole foods, and everybody was telling everybody else about how you really shouldn't eat raw tomatoes.

I on the other hand have found myself a lone voice in trying to convince friends and coworkers that 40 cases of salmonella poisoning (or 400 or even 4000 cases) out of millions and millions of pounds of fresh tomatoes that would have been served during the affected period (April 24th - May 27th) is not statistically significant, and is also two weeks past relevance.

As of yesterday the Subways in my area had started serving them again on account of the fact that all of their tomatoes came from inside Texas, and Texas tomatoes were ruled out as the source of the salmonella over a week ago (or to be more specific several days before everyone started freaking out).

Meanwhile CNN who was reporting 38 cases nationwide a week ago, was suddenly reporting that number as "under 200" reported salmonella cases as of yesterday with "no new cases having been reported in the past 2 weeks." This came mysteriously on the heels of another story about how no one pulled their tomatoes during the 2006 salmonella-tomato outbreak inspite of the fact that there were 183 reported cases and more states affected.

Theories abound in our local Austin papers about why so many people and business are reacting differently this time. Most of these theories point to the idea of "greater consumer concern" and a "stronger sense of responsibility" among food vendors. Having heard nothing of the 2006 salmonella outbreak until yesterday I have my own theory. I suspect when the story broke in 2006 it didn't happen to be a slow news day.

Still I am amazed at how many times I have heard people get upset in the last few days with the few restaurants still serving tomatoes. A local radio show I was listening to the other day went off on a tirade about how irresponsible it was for any restaurant to serve them, and a woman in front of me in line at the Potato Club was going off on the owner of said business about how dangerous it was to serve them to anyone. My unshared thought towards this concerned consumer was "I am pregnant and I want my very safe, low-risk, fresh tomatoes ::insert expletive name-calling here::."

My husband tried to inform the distraught lady that it took all of 15 seconds at 145 degrees to kill salmonella (which in case your curious is approximately the temperature of the inside of my car when not air conditioned these days), not to mention the fact that her chances of catching it are 1 in many millions and probably less than that since the outbreak subsided before the story broke.

For those of you still concerned, the next time you go out to eat contemplate this: what do you think the chances are of the person behind the counter/grill making a random mistake or oversight that causes you to get sick... like forgetting to wash hands after handling raw meat, using the wrong knife, leaving the tartar sauce out too long, coming to work sick, etc.?

I suspect that unless you are an extremely paranoid individual this threat does not generally keep you from eating the food. Yet 40 people catching a not very serious illness out of the millions of pounds of tomatoes served in this country in a month gives you pause... Why?


Forced Labor: North Koreans Working Abroad

Is it forced labor? Have Russia and the Czech Republic imported a small piece of an oppressive regime onto their own soil?

It began in the 1970's, with the ill fated Baikul-Amur Railroad, an attempt by the Soviet government to build a railway across Siberia. North Korea contributed to the project by sending prisoners to labor camps in Siberia that would assist in the construction of the railway.

The railroad was never finished but decades later North Korean laborers are still hard at work in the dense Siberian forests mostly as loggers, though technically no longer prisoners. Though their wages are low, their days long, and their off days few, the North Koreans bearing these extreme conditions actually choose to be there. In fact, many had to bribe officials for the opportunity.

An NPR story by Gregory Feifer tells of their isolation from the surrounding community:

Occasionally, the gate opens to allow laborers through, usually in groups of three. Walking along the road, they look bedraggled and weather beaten, and they're forbidden to speak to anyone. One worker, who speaks fairly good Russian, says he doesn't want to talk because he doesn't understand the language.

Local residents say the workers keep to themselves.

"When we come across them in the forest, they're afraid of us. We used to feel sorry for them looking very poor, dressed in their black work clothes," says Tynda resident Liudmilla Alexandrovna. "But now we're used to them. After all, their lives here are far better than in North Korea."

Some camps are reported to have little by way of sanitation and are often subject to food shortages. Laborers are reported to be mistreated by the North Korean officials assigned to keep constant watch over them. The conditions are harsh as is the work itself, especially without the limited equipment and extreme temperatures of the Siberian wilderness.

In spite of this there is no shortage of North Korean men vying for a chance to work in the camps. The pay and conditions are said to be many times better than what they can find at home.

Not all North Koreans laborers are content with the arrangement. Kim Man-soo tolerated five years of back breaking labor in the mid-to-late 90's only to discover all of his wages had been sent to the North Korean government. He later defected.

From chosun.com:

"I worked 15 hours a day for five years. In July 1998, I counted the vouchers I had been given instead of money. They were worth US$3,000. That was my goal. I risked my life earning that money. I was excited about bringing the money home, but when I told the logging office to pay me, they said they had no money." The logging office had sent all the cash it received from Russia to the North. That was the last straw: Kim escaped in January 1999.

But it isn't only North Korean men competing for a chance to work in virtual slave labor abroad, nor is Russia the only destination. Over 400 North Korean women have found jobs in the Czech Republic. Most work as seamstresses sewing together leather headrests and arm rests for luxury cars including BMWs, Mercedes, and Renaults.

Though the women are considered well treated by comparison to their Siberian counterparts, their situation has raised the concerns of those in the Czech Republic and around Europe. The biggest brow-raiser is that 80% of their wages are deposited into a group account which they believe is then taken by the North Korean government, rather than returned to the women's families.

Employing North Koreans, it seems, is not so much a means of offering an oppressed people a better life, as it is funding a tyranical and oppressive communist regime, and possibly allowing a forced labor program within the bounds of a democratic country. Because of these concerns and at the request of organizations combating human trafficking, the Czech Republic has stopped issuing new visas to North Koreans.

From the International Herald Tribune:

"What we want," she added, is to ensure "that they get paid appropriately and that they can do what they want outside work hours."

Investigators have been unable to ascertain the extent of the North Koreans' personal freedoms, like speech and movement, Svec said.

In Nachod, the North Korean workers socialize with their foreign co-workers at the Snezka factory. They speak Czech and talk about work, but never socialize after work hours, colleagues said, and they are watched over by a translator who most often answers for them.

Without having the freedom to speak, "that means that they don't have any freedom at all on the ground of a democratic country," said Willy Fautre, director of Human Rights Without Frontiers. "This is just more evidence that the women are hostages of North Korean officials."

Whether or not the North Koreans' working conditions qualifies as forced labor is unclear given their apparent desire to do the work regardless of very low wages and under what by western standards are oppressive conditions. However the historical symmetry of this situation should not escape our notice: a country run by an ex-KGB officer importing communist labor camps onto its soil and a company known to have benefitted from forced labor in the past, BMW, seemingly taking advantage of it again, pokes at our subconscious, and subtly raises the question: could history be repeating itself in some way?

From Youtube.com: An English documentary on the Siberian labor camps employing North Korean workers.

Back to May Day 2008: A Day of Remembrance


A History The EU Wants to Forget

The European Union recently debated a contentious issue dividing Western Europe from the former Soviet-Bloc countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The issue was a proposed formal condemnation of communism for crimes against humanity, inspired by prior condemnations of fascism and Nazism.

For formerly communist member states such as Latvia and Estonia, the proposed condemnation is a matter of justice and reconciliation of deep personal importance to their own people and essential to their continued relations with the rest of Europe. But the Western member states, never having experienced communism firsthand, view a condemnation of communism as unneccesary, politically inconvenient, and even revisionist.

From Radio Free Europe:

For those seeking to condemn communism for crimes against humanity, it's been an uphill battle. The strongest resistance comes from the EU's political left. Jan Marinus Wiersma, a Dutch socialist and a leading figure in the EU's socialist group, attacked what he described as "party-political interpretations of history.""All too often, differing interpretations can lead to different visions, different ways of understanding things, and sometimes xenophobia [and nationalism]," he said. "This is extraordinarily dangerous in a Europe which is characterized by diversity, that includes ethnic diversity. There are no simple answers to difficult historical questions. Let's not overlook this, because quite often, people have a populist interpretation of history."

Wiersma attacked attempts at drawing "facile or glib comparisons" between totalitarian regimes -- without once, however, identifying either by name. He said such debates have no place on the EU's agenda.

The leader of the smaller European United Left, French politician Francis Wurtz, was more outspoken. He rejected the idea of a "Nuremberg of ideologies" and said putting Soviet-era crimes on a par with those of Nazism "relativizes" the Holocaust and other Nazi atrocities. Even if lawmakers could find a common stance on the issue, the best the body could do formally is pass a moral judgment on communism. The real powers on such matters lie with the member states.

In April 2007, EU justice ministers passed a law making it a criminal offense to publicly condone, deny, or trivialize "genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes" -- provided such crimes were recognized as such by the Nuremberg Tribunal of 1945 or the statute of the International Criminal Court of 2002. Neither makes any reference to communist crimes. The EU's executive, the European Commission, has been instructed to study whether the need exists to augment the list of crimes.

In this age of Youtube and instant media, it's hard to believe that Western Europeans could remain oblivious to the record of crimes perpetrated by communist governments in their own backyard. To jog their memory, we present a small collection of videos documenting communist attrocities in Eastern Europe. If the EU fails to recognize and condemn these horrific crimes for any reason, then perhaps the rest of the developed world should be condemning the EU.

Genocide against and forced starvation of Ukrainian peasants in the 1930s.

The forced deportation of The Kalmyks to Siberia

Part 2 of a documentary on the Romanian Gulag of Pitesti

A collection of drawings and paintings made by gulag survivor Thomas Sgovio.

Back to May Day 2008: A Day of Remembrance


A Video Memorial to Victims of Khmer Rouge

The Khmer Rouge seized power in Cambodia in 1975 and attempted to impose upon the Cambodian people their own vision of an agricultural communist utopia. In the process, they executed intellectuals en masse; forced millions out of their homes and into slavery; imprisoned, tortured, and murdered thousands; and brought starvation to many hundreds of thousands more. Estimates of the death toll range from 850,000 to 2,000,000 in a country whose population numbered a mere 7.5 million in 1975.

The video below focuses on one of Cambodia's most notorious concentration camps, Tuol Sleng, in which the Khmer Rouge kept thorough records of the many thousands they tortured and slaughtered.


Back to May Day 2008: A Day of Remembrance


More on FLDS

I don't know if everyone is getting an earful of the FLDS situations outside of the national news segments, but being in texas it is covered everyday in nearly every newspaper, every local news broadcast, and then it's on the national news, 20/20, CNN etc. The story is everywhere, and in spite of many news anchors trying hard to spin it as a crazy polygamist cult snubbing the texas legal system. I have trouble seeing those women as anything but a religious and cultural minority group having their kids taken away because the state doesn't approve of their lifestyle.

 I certainly do not care for the brand of polygamy practiced by this group nor for underage marriage, but my understanding was that in most states teenagers could get married underage with parental consent. I do not know if sexual abuse has happened in this community however I can tell you that the state's excessive response will only decrease the likelihood of abuse being reported in the future.

 I grew up in a physically abusive home (not the living with a drunk kind more of the christ gets beaten into you kind which is one of the reasons I am now atheist), and I can tell you from experience that the fear of being put into foster care and therefore separated from our siblings is one of the things that kept us quiet.

I think it is very likely that there are men, women, and children being mistreated in this community from the sheer fact that the people in this community have very powerful incentives not to come forward to anyone outside of their community when such events happen. The risk is being persecuted for your religion, being separated from your family, losing your kids, being ostracized by the FLDS community, and being an outsider everywhere else (of course there are religious issues too like eternal damnation via excommunication).

I would compare it to the likelihood of a prostitute or illegal immigrant being abused; since the law is already not on their side, abuse happens often because the victims are not likely to report it.

A woman being abused by her husband within the FLDS has everything to lose by coming forward, and given Texas's most recent response, it seems she has everything to lose for her entire community. Imagine that. If you come forward you could lose not only your own kids but everyone in your family and community's kids.

Regardless I have always resented the idea that the state could just swoop in and take your kids on such flimsy evidence. I have seen reports on a number of cases through the years in which children were taken away on hearsay, flimsy eyewitness reports like neighbors thinking they witnessed inappropriate contact when a father was hugging his child, and rumors like they saw too many beer cans in the garbage.

Now over 400 kids are being put into foster homes with foster parents that cannot possibly practice the same religion as them, who will not likely understand nor approve of their religion. I can tell you from experience in that regard as well that that can really muck with a kid's psyche. Wondering if you are sinning or forsaking the religion you were raised with because of the new rules you are being forced to follow... (eat your ham Muhammed it's good for you).

Doesn't it make more sense to remove the abuser, not the alegedly abused, especially in a group of this size with such specific religious views?


Republican failure, libertarian victory

As of the writing of this post Ron Paul has received 513,533 votes* (this is with some precincts still unreported in some states including approximately 80% reported in California) in primaries, and 37,274 votes* (Maine is still at 68% reported) in caucuses.

With the exception of the 1980 presidential race in which Ed Clark drew in over 900,000 votes, Ron Paul has now pulled in more votes in the primary elections than any Libertarian candidate ever has in the general election.** Keep in mind that general elections traditionally have a much higher turnout than primaries do. Meanwhile there are still over 20 states that have yet to hold their elections.

This will not be a huge consolation to disappointed Paul supporters who hoped for at least a win in Alaska, but for those of us who have been following libertarian politics for multiple elections this is actually quite phenomenal. It means he might actually top a million in votes (a result better than any Libertarian Party candidate has ever gotten in the U.S.) long before the conventions roll around.

Of course this may not mean a great deal at the Republican National Convention, but it ought to mean a great deal to the libertarian movement in general. The amount of money and support Ron Paul has been able to garner in what has to be the shortest primary season in history actually makes me very optimistic about the future of libertarianism in this country.

While America is clearly not quite ready for a President Paul, it seems an infusion of both libertarian ideas, and candidates into the national debate has become inevitable. And with thousands of Ron Paul Revolutionaries all over the U.S. now learning firsthand how to organize, fundraise, recruit, and actively campaign on a local level, even an abysmal showing for Paul in the months to come will not be able to dampen a very bright future for both the U.S. constitution and libertaria in general.

*Primary data obtained from cnn.com.

**Past presidential results obtained from wikipedia.


Heinlein on Voting

"If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for ... but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong."

-From Time Enough for Love

 And just for balance since I know that this is an unpopular sentiment around here, here are some far more interesting Heinlein quotes:

 The most preposterous notion that H. sapiens has ever dreamed up is that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of all the Universes, wants the saccharine adoration of His creatures, can be swayed by their prayers, and becomes petulant if He does not receive this flattery. Yet this absurd fantasy, withou a shred of evidence to bolster it, pays all the expenses of the oldest, largest, and least productive industry in all history.

I don't trust a man who talks about ethics when he is picking my pocket. But if he is acting in his own self-interest and says so, I have usually been able to work out some way to do business with him.

"Progress doesn't come from early risers - progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things."

"Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny."

"Be wary of strong spirits. It can make you shoot at tax collectors ... and miss."

-From the Notebooks of Lazarus Long

But does Man have any "right" to spread through the universe? Man is what he is, a wild animal with the will to survive, and (so far) the ability, against all competition. Unless one accepts that, anything one says about morals, war, politics, you name it, is nonsense. Correct morals arise from knowing what man is, not what do-gooders and well-meaning old Aunt Nellies would like him to be. The Universe will let us know - later - whether or not Man has any "right" to expand through it.

Of course, the Marxian definition of value is ridiculous. All the work one cares to add willl not turn a mud pie into an apple tart; it remains a mud pie, value zero. By corollary, unskillful work can easily subtract value; an untalented cook can turn wholesome dough and fresh green apples, valuable already, into an inedible mess, value zero. Conversely, a great chef can fashion of those same materials a confection of greater value than a commonplace apple tart, with no more effort than an ordinary cook uses to prepare an ordinary sweet. These kitchen illustrations demolish the Marxian theory of value - the fallacy from which the entire magnificent fraud of communism derives - and to illustrate the truth of the common-sense defintion as measured in terms of use.

"Value" has no meaning other than in relationship to living beings. The value of a thing is always relative to a particular person, is completely personal and different in quantity for each living human—"market value" is a fiction, merely a rough guess at the average of personal values, all of which must be quantitatively different or trade would be impossible. [...] This very personal relationship, "value", has two factors for a human being: first, what he can do with a thing, its use to him… and second, what he must do to get it, its cost to him. There is an old song which asserts that "the best things in life are free". Not true! Utterly false! This was the tragic fallacy which brought on the decadence and collapse of the democracies of the twentieth century; those noble experiments failed because the people had been led to believe that they could simply vote for whatever they wanted… and get it, without toil, without sweat, without tears."

-From Starship Troopers

Starship troopers also has quite a few character tirades against natural rights. It is actually a really good book in spite of that fact. ;)


It's Coming

The 5 year anniversary of the Iraq invasion occurs on March 20, 2008. I suspect if the media is not too obsessed with presidential politics at that time there will be quite a bit of review and introspection on the half decade we have spent there. Of course they may just ignore the date entirely.

I have found however what I believe is the most appropriate data point to revisit:

YouTube President Bush addresses the nation March 2003.

This is G.W.'s address to the nation within a few hours after initiation of the invasion.  What strikes me the most from the video is Bush's intense focus on Saddam Hussein. Now multiple years after his death it seems the world hasn't exactly become a better place in spite of the accomplishment of this goal -though I presume that in some small way Iraq must have.

That being said I suspect that trading the terror of tyranny for the terror of terrorists, and the continuing chaos of war cannot be that noticable (or useful) of an improvement.  


Does it Take a Republican?

I have been to a handful of local Libertarian meetings in the past (all of which were in georgia not texas), and I have to admit they are usually somewhat lame. Though the UGA libertarians were slightly better it was still generally just a bunch guys getting together to complain and make fairly small plans (i.e. who is going to man the next OPH booth...) The local libertarians were usually a mix of quacks, artists, and pot smokers with quite a bit of overlap between the three categories.

As such the discourse in the meetings tended to be conspiracy-theory-esque with the occasional damn-the-man bitching.

I just got home from the first (presumably ever) Austin Liberty ball. It was a rally/concert for Ron Paul. ::note: you can call me a paultard if you want. It was still really awesome!::

From austinlibertyball.com:

One of the Largest Ron Paul MeetUp Groups + "Live
Music Capital of the World" = Austin Liberty Ball. New to Ron Paul?
Seasoned supporter? Come out for an evening unlike any other. We will
be showcasing the top videos of the grassroots movement, guest speakers
and some of the best music Austin has to offer -- all in the name of
liberty & Ron Paul.

Need to register to vote? Want to learn how to be a delegate?
Want to be a precinct captain? Looking to score a yard sign? Want to
hear great live music in a like minded environment?

...come out and join the Revolution.

It even included some libertarian-themed music. It took place in a large coffee shop in south austin. There was a $5 cover and the place was packed... standing room only for the speakers (it cleared out a little when the bands started playing).

I only arrived in time to hear the last speaker who happened to be an organizer of ronpaulbillboards.com talking about some of the successes his website had had, and the plans to put up a billboard in austin.

This highlighted the great and very likely unintentional genius of Ron Paul's campaign: decentralized power. Allowing supporters anywhere to buy and spread their own advertising (the austin meetup is funding locally run tv ads as we speak), come up with their own fundraising plans, hold their own rallies and marches, and even hold concerts in his honor has not only made it possible for Ron Paul to continue his campaign far longer than anyone expected to, but has also ignited a very active, passionate, and creative nationwide libertarian-oriented movement.

And while this decentralization may appear to be the obvious fuel of this movement I have difficulty imagining a Libertarian Party candidate having such success even with a similarly structured campaign.

Which makes me wonder does it take a Republican to light a fire under libertaria, or is Ron Paul just that cool... (given his speaking style and propensity for dicussions on monentary policy the latter option would be very ironic).


Ron Paul and the Hope of Winning.

I am a fan of Ron Paul. I was long before he ran for president. Checking out his latest issue or bill via his congressional website was something I liked to do on occasion. Thus seeing him run for president in a campaign that is garnering more and more money and attention is something I find very exciting.

I am one of those weirdos that gets enthralled with 30 second clips of Ron Paul speeches presented on the nightly news. I peruse google regularly for new articles about him and his campaign, and I even have my tivo preset to record shows that list him in their description.

That being said there is quite a bit of lunacy floating in the minds of some of his supporters. (Of course I am not talking about the obvious kooks: conspiracy theorists, white supremacists, people who tivo ron paul etc.).

Just follow any comment thread on just about any article regarding ron paul and you will find individuals who seriously believe that the "scientific" polls are somehow seriously flawed. That there will be this amazing groundswell of supporters in the primaries and that Ron Paul will readily come out the frontrunner in spite of poll numbers.

Its not that I think the polls are perfect or even that accurate. Its that I do not believe they are that wrong. Going from 3-5 percent to winning the primaries is a bit of a leap isn't it?

Its not that I think its impossible for Ron to get the nomination, it is just unlikely. I'll compare it to my predictions for Georgia to be in the national championship game which consisted of something like this:

If X team loses against a team they should easily beat, and Y team also loses in a game they are favored to win and a certain gold and purple team loses the sec championship game and no one pays any attention to what a certain other virginia team is doing... and ::Ta Da:: Georgia is in the championship game... maybe...

Laugh if you like. It came very close to happening.

You have to figure that that is what also-rans like Duncan Hunter and Joe Biden are hoping for. A sudden turn in their favor, a bad gaff by a front runner, combined with a premature exit by a few of those polling slightly better than them, and who knows?

Likewise Paul's campaign will likely benefit by sheer stubborness. Its one of those advantages of being a long shot candidate: there is no reason to drop out when it becomes evident that you are not likely to get the nomination. As you were never likely, there is no reason not to stick around and pick up supporters of also-rans, and hope the party has a change of heart.

 

 

 


The Media and the "Second-Tier"

I have been following the Ron Paul presidential campaign for literally a couple of weeks, so not that long. Still when I finally paid enough attention to get interested in his campaign I discovered how frustrating the media can be when you are interested in hearing and seeing the "second tier" candidates.

In spite of being approximately a year out from any major nominating convention the media has already determined who does and does not have a chance of getting the nomination. Of course this is pretty standard for political pundits however, they are also actively reinforcing the candidates positions as front runners or "second tier candidates."

For example the front runners in debates will get asked nearly every question and are typically allowed extra time to answer it even after the official time has ended. While they move on quickly from the long shot candidates and often do not offer others the chance to debate what has been said.

The lesser candidates are lucky if they get to answer 2-3 questions during the whole event. Meanwhile it seems the "second tier" notion is being emphasized on the local level as well. From the Austin-American Statesman (the article is about the upcoming Texas straw poll):

 

Sydney Hay, Hunter's campaign manager, predicted that conservatives
will "again prove that this is not just a race between a couple of
so-called 'front-runners' whose current lead in the national polls is
based on pure name ID alone and is in steady decline as Republican
voters begin to learn about the candidates."

GOP consultant Chad Wilbanks warned against activists favoring a
lesser-known candidate because actual voters in the March primary will
be unlikely to follow their lead, rendering the poll results
meaningless.

Participants "are going to have to choose someone who has a
realistic chance of winning, even if they're not there," Wilbanks said.
"They cannot pick a second-tier candidate. You want to have some sort
of credibility."

 

So Texas Republicans are being discouraged from picking a candidate in a non-binding vote that has not already been determined to be a frontrunner by the media and the traditional polls. Meanwhile the strong finish of second tier candidates in other local and state straw polls has not inspired the media in the least to reassess the "second-tier" label of any of these candidates, and of course an internet following doesn't count for anything.

Thus mainstream media is turning "second-tier" status into a self fulfilling prophecy. In fact the republican CNN-YouTube debate has seemingly been called off because of the refusal of the front runners to participate. First it was postponed, and now it is being called the "Florida debate." It is unclear if youTubers will get to participate or if it will just be another canned frontrunner media spot.

Yet if the frontrunners do not want to field questions from youTubers while the second-tier lesser heard candidates do isn't the solution to let all parties have their wish? It would be really nice to hear a debate that was not 90 percent Rudy and Mitt. Those two not showing up would make for a far more interesting hour of television, and we might actually get some straight answers for once.

Of course CNN cannot have a debate with only second-tier candidates, that would, after all scar its credibility as a debate venue. Front-runners it turns out hold within their magnanimous talking heads the entire legitimacy of the whole process.


My Obscure Liberalism

To me the following quote embodies what it means philosophically to be "liberal."
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Voltaire

I think it necessitates tolerance of differing opinions, a belief in the rights of individuals, a belief in the right to freedom of speech, and a strong enough belief in these rights that you would die to protect them.

Thus I find it difficult if not impossible to ascribe the term "liberal" to those unfamiliar with this concept.

The sad thing is just how very obscure my definition is in this day and age.


Chavez Steals 30 Billion From Private Oil Companies

Chavez completes takeover of private oil fields:

The companies ceding control included BP Plc, ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil Corp, Chevron Corp, France's Total SA and Norway's Statoil ASA. All but ConocoPhillips signed agreements last week agreeing in principle to state control, and ConocoPhillips said Tuesday that it too was cooperating.

While the state takeover was planned well ahead of time, the oil companies remain locked in a behind-the-scenes struggle with the government.

Chavez says the state is taking a minimum 60 per cent stake in the Orinoco operations, but he is urging foreign companies to stay and help develop the fields.

They have until June 26 to negotiate the terms.

The companies have leverage with Chavez because experts agree that Venezuela's state oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela SA, cannot transform the Orinoco's tar-like crude into marketable oil without their investment and experience.

So Chavez lays claim to the capital without the expertise or experts to effectively use it. This scenario seems familiar. I hope ConocoPhilips holds their ground if possible or leaves entirely.


The Crimeless State

A few weeks back I was surfing the blogosphere when I came across the statement from a marxist that crime is a capitalistic concept because it is attached to the concept of property. Honestly I had never thought of it that way.

Thus I came to contemplate what is "crime" when not attached to property. The connection of property to crime seems to be one of the essential elements of commonlaw governance. Of course there is the idea of the victimless crimes, and other vice crimes (blue laws come to mind). The banning of the sale of alcohol on certain "holy days" in certain places. Prostitution, illegal gambling, and drug possession though all involving property in some way do not involve another person infringing on property at least not until the government steps in to enforce its mandate.

These are all things that in my mind are not crimes, at least not outside of a governmental declaration (i.e. legislation) that they are. Thus if property is detached from the concept of crime the only activities that will be called criminal are those that the state declares criminal.

This is important because at least in the western world we have this notion that the state should never be above the law. Clearly the practice of this is not what it should be in the western world, but we do still have this protection to a degree.

Purgery, corruption, theft, and murder are all crimes we can hold our leaders, officials, and police responsible for. Thanks in no small part to our common law system of governance. If all law and crime becomes dictates of the government detached from any concept of property and thus any system of common law among the people, then there is no way for the government to ever be held to any legal standards.

The state has in effect become crimeless because nothing it does can be considered a crime unless it declares its own actions criminal. As such any form of commonlaw or other customary law are immediately destroyed in communist regimes, that the state may become the ultimate arbiter of what is and is not criminal activity and none of those standards will be applied to itself.

The result is governments that incarcerate, starve, and often execute citizens it believes to be too powerful, too rich, too stuborn, not thinking correctly or even in the case of North Korea simply related to someone who disagrees with the government. The atrocities of communist governments continue to compile to this day, because owning one's own life is a "capitalistic concept" attached to the idea that your body and existence can be and is your own property.

It Is no accident that criminals in communist states tend to be those who disagree with the government rather than those who have stolen, destroyed property, or attacked their fellow humans. Crime in the totalitarian regimes becomes an issue not of respecting the property and boundaries of your fellow humans, but of the state deeming you or your behavior improper in some way.

Without a means for the people to hold the state responsible for its actions detaching the concept of crime from the concept of property made the atrocities of communist regimes not only probable but inevitable.


Free Cuba

This is a documentary originally made by The Lexington League and propagated on Youtube about Oswaldo José Payá Sardiñas, founder of the Varela Project, and his struggle as a political dissident under the Castro regime.


Back to May Day 2007: A Day of Remembrance


The Great Kim Jong Il

North Korean communist propoganda has found its way to Youtube giving us a glimpse to what the citizens of that country might see daily.


This is the description of the video from its contributor::

Dear Leader Comrade Generalissimo Kim Jong Il the brilliant statesman, political genius, prolific author, musical virtuoso, master of the arts, prodigious humanist, invincible military commander and respected Lodestar of national reunification leads the Korean nation in building the great powerful prosperous country with his adroit and inovative economic ideas.

Making the rounds on field guidance insterction tours, Comrade Kim Jong Il always makes himself aware of every details of a situation and teaches the creative ways to overcome difficulties in reaching the targets of the six-years plans which are the driving force of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea economic processes based on the mass-centered Juche-orientated Korean-style socialism which is the system the Korean people have freely chosen by themselves out of their own free will.

Thus Leader Kim Jong Il is the mass-based leader truly serving the people by bringing about the great upswing in revolutionary economic building for the prosperity of the Korean people and all of humankind.


This description is from its contributor:

Dear Leader Comrade Generalissimo Kim Jong Il's wise perfect leadership is so extraordinary and genuinely mass people-based that the entire Korean nation rely upon Him as their god giving him the passionate worship of the peerlessly great Mt. Paektu-type general born of Heaven.

Drawing strenght from the all-powefull image of Kim Jong Il, the Korean people can always achieve the greatest victories.

Also available on YouTube:

Kim Jong Il The Great Athlete
Kim Jong Il The Great Warrior
Kim Jong Il Fashion Designer
Kim Jong Il The Great Traveler
Kim Jong Il The Great Architect

And many more...

Back to May Day 2007: A Day of Remembrance


Hoeryong: Peering Inside a Death Camp

From MSNBC.com, " Former guard: Ahn Myong Chol remembers atrocities:"

A food factory produced soy sauce and cookies and bean paste. And here the women worked between 20 and 30 years old. The women are the sexual slaves of the security officers, they are forced to wear only white thin gowns and no underwear, they are not given underwear. They make all the beautiful women work here.

The prisoners go to the coal mine along this road, in carts pulled by cows. And while they are passing through here, I was instructed to beat a disabled person by my superior, and I had no choice but to obey.

Even in the small village there is an officers headquarters, and if any prisoner disobeys, then he can be beaten here, and the officers were armed, and they would kill prisoners here.

Not only here but all other places, even in the small hills they bury bodies. And when we cut the trees down, sometimes we find a buried body. Not only here, but all around here are buried bodies.

In the hills here, if there is some flat area, it is covered with graves. And if people start to farm there, they find bodies or bones.

This area is where there are the most densely buried bodies. There are graves all over here, and we can see the graves where there are no woods. There is no particular area to bury dead bodies, but they put them all in this general vicinity, and no one can cry. It is forbidden to cry, and there is no funeral ceremony, and the officers say, “The anti-revolutionary person has died, so there is no reason to cry.”

How can these things happen?

The gulag seems like a thing of the past. It seems like knowing about these atrocities should somehow keep them from happening. Shedding light on it and exposing atrocity to the eyes of the world should prevent a repeat of history, right?

We hear about cruel things happening in areas of instability --- ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia, genocide in Rwanda, and the continued chaos in Darfur. While these events are certainly terrible, they seem to have a different flavor from the concentraion camps described in the above quote. Genocide often arises in times of conflict, times when it's very hard for the rest of the world to have a sense of what's going on, where the fog of war hides the bloodshed. When the war ends, when the fog lifts, the atrocities end. Thus, we have a way of fighting war-born atrocities: end war.

Yet, the systematic killings carried out by tyrannical states exist in places not embroiled in war. Should the lessons of the past not relegate them to a dark page of human history? Have we not learned from the past? Perhaps, it's the very stability that perpetuates their existence. The gulags are isolated and protected behind the curtain of militarized government ruling over an insular society cut off from the rest of the world. As such, we have few tools to fight these atrocities, or even know that they occur. We have to rely on the tales of those that escape, on old pictures taken in secret or from a distance, and satelite imagery.

Today we look to North Korea, to a camp on its north-eastern border secluded in mountains. It is called the Hoeryong concentration camp. Because so few priosoners ever make it out alive, most of the stories we have come from former employees.


Who are The Prisoners of Hoeryong?

From The U.S. Committee on Human Rights in North Korea, The Hidden Gulag:

The most strikingly abnormal feature of the kwan-li-so system is the philosophy of “collective responsibility,” or “guilt by association” — yeon-jwa-je — whereby the mother and father, sisters and brothers, children and sometimes grandchildren of the offending political prisoner are imprisoned in a three-generation practice. Former prisoners and guards trace this practice to a 1972 statement by “Great Leader” Kim Il Sung: “Factionalists or enemies of class, whoever they are, their seed must be eliminated through three generations.” According to the testimony of a former guard at Kwan-li-so No. 11 at Kyungsung, North Hamgyong Province, this slogan was carved in wood in the prison guards’ headquarters building. According to the testimony of YOON Dae Il, a former police official, the number of family members abducted and sent to the lifetime labor camps depends on the severity of the presumed political offense.

The other strikingly abnormal characteristic of the kwan-li-so system is that prisoners are not arrested, charged (that is, told of their offense), or tried in any sort judicial procedure, where they would have a chance to confront their accusers or offer a defense with or even without benefit of legal counsel. The presumed offender is simply picked up and taken to an interrogation facility and frequently tortured to “confess” before being sent to the political penal-labor colony. The family members are also just picked up and deposited at the kwan-li-so, without ever being told of the whereabouts or wrongdoings of the presumed wrongdoer.

The most salient feature of day-to-day prison-labor camp life is the combination of below-subsistence food rations and extremely hard labor. Prisoners are provided only enough food to be kept perpetually on the verge of starvation. And prisoners are compelled by their hunger to eat, if they can get away with it, the food of the labor-camp farm animals, plants, grasses, bark, rats, snakes — anything remotely edible. It should be noted that below-subsistence-level food rations preceded, by decades, the severe nationwide food shortages experienced by North Korea in the 1990s.

Are Dissidents Being Gassed in Camp 22?

Witness statements and documents disputed by the Democratic Republic of North Korea are all we have to answer this question.

Witness statements from a report by The Guardian:


I witnessed a whole family being tested on suffocating gas and dying in the gas chamber,' he said. 'The parents, son and and a daughter. The parents were vomiting and dying, but till the very last moment they tried to save kids by doing mouth-to-mouth breathing.'

Hyuk has drawn detailed diagrams of the gas chamber he saw. He said: 'The glass chamber is sealed airtight. It is 3.5 metres wide, 3m long and 2.2m high_ [There] is the injection tube going through the unit. Normally, a family sticks together and individual prisoners stand separately around the corners. Scientists observe the entire process from above, through the glass.'

He explains how he had believed this treatment was justified. 'At the time I felt that they thoroughly deserved such a death. Because all of us were led to believe that all the bad things that were happening to North Korea were their fault; that we were poor, divided and not making progress as a country.

'It would be a total lie for me to say I feel sympathetic about the children dying such a painful death. Under the society and the regime I was in at the time, I only felt that they were the enemies. So I felt no sympathy or pity for them at all.'

His testimony is backed up by Soon Ok-lee, who was imprisoned for seven years. 'An officer ordered me to select 50 healthy female prisoners,' she said. 'One of the guards handed me a basket full of soaked cabbage, told me not to eat it but to give it to the 50 women. I gave them out and heard a scream from those who had eaten them. They were all screaming and vomiting blood. All who ate the cabbage leaves started violently vomiting blood and screaming with pain. It was hell. In less than 20 minutes they were quite dead.'

So I find myself wondering if Hoeryong will someday have the same sort of name recognition of Auschwitz. Will we someday, after some sort of liberation or struggle, look into this prison and wonder: How could this have happened in our world, in this day and age? How could it have gone on this long? How could it have gotten this bad? Could we have done anything to prevent it or change it? Will it happen again?

For more Info including satelite images, witness statements, a complete copy of The Hidden Gulag and a history of North Korea's prison camps please visit:

U.S. Committee on Human Rights in North Korea

Back to May Day 2007: A Day of Remembrance


Why Not Haiti?

Tonight American Idol is making a big spectacle of their own special desires to "Give Back." One of the beneficiaries of their charity is going to be Africa. The other beneficiary will be gulf coast areas still recovering from Katrina.

While I am not generally (and by that I mean not at all) a big adherent of altruistic endeavors I have to wonder why help Africa, or more specifically why not Haiti?

It seems like there is always a big drive to fix Africa, and it is a big place with many problems. However I think it makes a certain amount of sense to focus on your neighbors first. Haiti is one of the poorest nations in the world and it is really close by.

For that matter why don't we hear about more charity programs to help Mexico? I just cannot help but wonder if there happens to be some underlying politics out there in big money charity land that make some potential recipients more appealing than others.