ReasonTV’s ‘Nanny of the Month’ for May, 2012: Michael Bloomberg

 

The Dictator’s practical internet guide to power retention

Daniel Hannan: Politicians can’t create jobs

This is an important point – and one that all politicians ought to be reminded of, often and firmly.

I am not an economist, so there is no way I am going to articulate this eloquently or even remotely well, but…I would not be myself if I didn’t give it a shot.

There is an old joke – very old – that could get people sent to jail if they said a variation of it back behind the iron curtain, where I grew up:

What is the fastest way to get rid of all the sand in the Sahara desert?

Create a government department with the sole purpose of supplying sand to the Sahara.  Give it a steering committee, a 5 year plan and lots of money and power to enforce policies.  For a little while, nothing will happen.  Then:  BOOM!  Sand will be more scarce in the Sahara than meat is in butcher shops!

(If you are one of the younger readers who does not remember what life behind the iron curtain was like, let me just say that butcher shops usually had very, very little to offer.  If a supply of meat was even rumoured to be coming in, people would stand in lines for hours, sometimes lining up all night just so they may be one of the first few in line in the morning because the supplies were so meager that even with limits per customer, only the first few people in line would get to buy any meat.  Bread and milk were usually available, but again, even with bread, the supply would run out before the demand.  I remember days when the limit would be set at one quarter loaf of bread per customer, so that my mom would go line up and send me to line upseparately, so we’d get half a loaf between us.  No kidding.  We had money – but there was no ‘stuff’ to buy with it.)

‘Governments creating jobs’ is one of those easy to fall into fallacies.  Like ‘the broken window’ fallacy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG3AKoL0vEs&feature=colike

The fact is that governments do not just ‘have money’ to spend:  their money comes from taxes, current or future.  Taxes are taken from people who earn it by the threat of force:  these people now no longer have that money to spend to look after themselves and their family.

Ah, say government spending proponents, but what if people want to save their money instead of spending it?  That would be bad for the economy and that is why governments must take it from them and spend it!

Isn’t that just a little oppressive?  And arrogant?

A government is supposed to represent the people and do the people’s bidding – not force people to do the government’s bidding!

The suggestion that governments should spend the people’s money because people don’t want to spend it themselves is illustrative of how the relationship between the citizens and our government has been inverted:  insted of being our servant, the government has become our master, forcing us to do what we do not want to do.

That we are proposing ‘government stimulus spending’ and ‘government creating jobs’ as desirable actions should give us a moment of pause to consider what this implies about our relationship to our governments and the status of our civil liberties!

JotForm’s domain suspended for user-generated content

JotForm is a web company that lets people easily generate forms for whatever they need.  Now, their domain has been siezed and their site has been blocked in a SOPA-style action.  From the JotForm blog:

‘UPDATE: Many people on the comments assumed the content was posted by us. This can happen to any site that allows public to post content. SOPA may not have passed, but what happened shows that it is already being practiced. All they have to do is to ask Godaddy to take a site down. We have 2 millions user generated forms. It is not possible for us to manually review all forms. This can happen to any web site that allows user generated content.’

(Emphasis added by me.)

So, here we have yet another confirmation that despite of SOPA itself having been scrapped, the practices it was normalizing already exist and are being followed by state agents.

This is outrageous on so many levels…and yet, it is even worse on the other side of the pond

We must shine the light under all these proverbial rocks, or we’ll be overrun by the creepy-crawlies!

A look at what has been happening in the EU lately

From Daniel Hannan, as interviewed by RT:

And from Nigel Farage:

 

Missouri judge rules in favour of warrantless GPS surveillance

From WiredNews:

‘The ruling, upholding federal theft and other charges, is one in a string of decisions nationwide supporting warrantless GPS surveillance. Last week’s decision comes as the Supreme Court is expected to rule on the issue within months in an unrelated case.’

It seems that ‘expectation of privacy’ is dwindling so much that pretty soon, there will be no expectation of privacy for anyone, anywhere!

Just how far will we permit ‘big brother’ to stretch the ‘no expectation of privacy’?

Let’s see just how close to zero expectation of privacy we actually are, right now:

  • We  do not have it when walking around in public, as the use of surveilance cameras is being supplemented by a growing fleet of unmarked back-scatter X-ray vans roaming the urban streets.
  • We do not have it in our cars – either the built-in GPS system (like OnStar) can be accessed by ‘big brother’ or ‘big brother’ can add his own, as the above ruling shows.
  • We no longer have it in any form of electronic communication, as laws like SOPA and PIPA make warantless surveilance of all electronic communication the norm, thus removing any expectation to privacy in anything one does online, including VOIP phone calls.
  • US citizens do not have an expectation of privacy in their homes, as the courts there have ruled (I think I blogged it at the time) that using high-tech surveillance tools (including infrared detectors to monitor the movement of individuals inside the home) is perfectly legal as long as the tools are used outside of the home.

Where is left?

Truly and honestly, where do we have left where we enjoy ‘expectation of privacy’?!?!?

When you have no place left where you have ‘an expectation of privacy’, does this mean that the government has the right to monitor your every move, 24/7/365?

Is this truly the society we wish to build?

Tommy Robinson tells details of how he was attacked by Islamists – again

GoDaddy: a case study in how democracy is being lost

December 29th, 2011, is the official ‘Boycott GoDaddy Day’:  everyone is being encouraged to move any domain names they may have with GoDaddy

Why GoDaddy?

Let me count the ways…

Yes, GoDaddy has backtracked on their support of SOPA – but this is more than just a case of ‘too little, too late’.

GoDaddy actually helped draft SOPA – and is already one of the go-to companies when the US government  (long before SOPA ever becomes a law) wants to blacklist websites:

“That was good enough for Judge Kent Dawson to order the names seized and transferred to GoDaddy, where they would all redirect to a page serving notice of the seizure. In addition, a total ban on search engine indexing was ordered, one which neither Bing nor Google appears to have complied with yet.”

Yes – right now, long before SOPA, a judge had ordered that a website be transferred to GoDaddy in order for it to make it easier to blacklist them – following a court proceeding where the accused may not even be notified until after the ruling is made.

(Aside:  this shows that the stated goal of SOPA – to protect copyrights from pirating – is unnecessary, as all of this is already being accomplished under current laws.  The scales of justice are already very strongly tipped towards the copyright holder and against regular citizens – SOPA would not only tip them even further, it would destroy the internet as we know it.  If, say, one copyright holder complained that one single blogger at WordPress were to publish a link on their blog that led to a home movie of their kid singing a (copyrighted) pop song, under SOPA, the whole of WordPress and all the innocent blogs on it would be blacklisted!!!!  Yes – this is what life under SOPA would be, and not just in the US because the effects would be internet-wide!)

It seems GoDaddy is a willing tool at best, an active collaborator in the process of oppressing people without just process at worst.  This is the type of behaviour which enables totalitarian governments to keep their populace ‘under control’!

It is easy to see why it is so very easy for people to hate GoDaddy – even before one considers their idiotic commercials or their CEO’s weird hobby of shooting and killing elephants…

In other words, GoDaddy is a poster child for the collusion of government and business – the result of which is that government policy is increasingly shaped by the concerns (and thus passes laws to the benefit of) of a smaller and smaller circle of businesses.  This leaves the citizenry unable to affect political change, since legislators of all stripes are dependent on these corporate interests to raise sufficient funds.

Have you ever heard of the ‘four boxes’ necessary for constitutional democracy to function?

  • Soap box: A box you stand on in the street trying to explain your views to the public. Figuratively, building public opinion for your case.
  • Ballot box: Public, free, democratic elections. If the laws don’t work, and the elected representatives don’t get it, replace them.
  • Jury box: If no public representatives get it, neither the elected nor those available to elect, the second to last line of defense is the judicial system, which can overturn laws that go against the most fundamental rights.
  • Ammo box: If the system has been so thoroughly corrupted that the entire establishment is acting as one, and it is not possible to change the laws to safeguard fundamental liberties, then only one option remains.

Think about this while keeping in mind the lessons of SOPA:

  • Our soap box is being taken away on the internet using anti-piracy and anti-child-predator laws so badly written that once passed, they can be used to ‘disappear’ any voice on the internet the government does not like – at the same time as anti-terrorism laws coupled with classifying even non-violent protesters as ‘low-grade terrorists’  and the rise of anti-blasphemy legislation is stripping our rights to speak our minds in public.
  • Our ballot box has been made irrelevant:  the political process has been so twisted that now, in order to get elected, governments are less reliant on the citizenry than they are on an ever-narrowing circle of corporate and special interests.  We, the regular people, no longer believe that it makes any difference whom we vote for, because all the politicians are responding to the needs of this circle,, not to the citizens.  THAT is why the voter turnouts are falling so rapidly:  ordinary people believe that the ballot box has been lost to irrelevance…
  • The Jury box:  that is where we are now!  We are now relying on the last of the checks and balances – the judiciary – to protect us.  But, if the above-linked ruling and the Austrian ruling against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff are any indication, we are quickly but surely loosing our third box, on both sides of the big pond!
  • Which inevitably leaves us with the very last box:  the ammo box…  This is not something I would like to see happen, but we must never forget that all our rights exist only as long as we are prepared to take up arms to defend them…which is why there is such a direct link between how oppressive a government is and how much it wishes to disarm its citizens.

So, how did we get from the GoDaddy boycott to taking up arms in defense of our innate rights?

GoDaddy has highlighted just how close we are to having lost our first three boxes.

It has highlighted just how high the stakes are.

It has shown us just how hard we have to fight so that our society does not devolve to that fourth box!

Time to end the war on drugs

Richard Branson takes a look at Portugal’s decade-long experiment of drug decriminilization:

“In 2001 Portugal became the first European country to officially abolish all criminal penalties for personal possession of drugs, including marijuana, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamines.”

.   .   .

“Following decriminalization, Portugal has the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in people over 15 in the EU: 10%. The most comparable figure in America is in people over 12: 39.8%, Proportionally, more Americans have used cocaine than Portuguese have used marijuana. “

This does not even touch on the principle of self-ownership, which means that nobody – including the government – has the right to permit/deny me putting whatever I choose into my body, from food to medicines and drugs.

The flip side of this whole war on drugs – and one which I never hear mentioned, but which has real life-altering implications on actual flesh-and-blood human beings – is that of the legality of use of medical drugs which governments seem to think they also have the right to regulate.

In Canada, where the government pays for drugs of senior citizens, the government intentionally drags its feet approvinglife-saving medications: it costs the government less per pill and the treatment is considerably shorter!  It’s all about incentives…

 

 

What do ‘Patriot’ missiles have in common with butter?

Both have been siezed from smugglers in Scandinavia this week.

Yes, it is hard to believe…

The ‘Patriot’ missiles were found in Finland:

“The Finnish authorities have impounded an Isle of Man-flagged ship bound for China with undeclared missiles and explosives, officials say.”

Over in Norway, where the government may fall over the butter shortage, they have caught butter smugglers:

“The two men, who snuck into the country from Sweden, were arrested with about 550 lbs of butter divided into 18-ounce packets, the Norwegian daily newspaper Adresseavisen reported.”

So, how can a country encounter such a catastrophic shortage of butter?

“Authorities at Norway’s butter monopoly blame the shortage on bad weather…”

Ah, ‘butter monopoly’… Say no more!