On Feb. 18, 1943, Hans and Sophie Scholl, a brother and sister, were arrested at the University of Munich for secretly (or not so secretly) putting out leaflets calling on Germans to revolt against Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime. In the previous year Hans had founded a group of students, who called themselves “The White Rose.” The group wrote and distributed six leaflets aimed at educated Germans. The leaflets made their way across Germany and to several other occupied countries. The Allies later dropped them all over the Third Reich.
John Hancock
I mean not to boast; I would not excite envy, but manly emulation. We have all one common cause; let it, therefore, be our only contest, who shall most contribute to the security of the liberties of America.
President Obama wants a conversation about encryption. “I lean probably further in the direction of strong encryption” than do some in law enforcement, he says; but he knows the “pressure they’re under to keep us safe.”
We had a “conversation” about our right to robustly encrypt our stuff in the 1990s, after Philip Zimmermann (pictured) created Pretty Good Privacy software to easily render data invulnerable to intruders, including officials eager to bypass any encryption at will. The government threatened to prosecute Zimmerman on bogus charges, but eventually dropped the matter. PGP proceeded apace.
CNET writer Declan McCullagh said it all in a recent tweet: “Obama wants ‘public conversation’ about encryption? Sure: It’s here, we’re not inserting backdoors, get used to it.”
Twitter-user “vruz” adds: “Remember when we had to have a responsible dialogue on the NSA’s mass criminality? When Obama says ‘conversation,’ he means dilution of discourse to co-opt it and make it meaningless.” #ouch.
Contrary to the president’s implication, privacy and safety reinforce each other. Ability to protect our privacy makes us safer from those who would use our passwords, Social Security numbers, and home addresses against us.
Yes, terrorists can use encryption to hide nefarious plans — just as they can use curtains that way. And basements. And cones of silence. Many things deployable for benign purposes can also abet vicious ones. But does this mean that everything innocent people have and do should be easily accessible to government officials — or savvy cyber-criminals?
Or terrorists?
No.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Sartre: Equal Liberty
Grover Cleveland
Values supposed to be fixed are fast becoming conjectural, and loss and failure have invaded every branch of business.
President Barack Obama takes full credit for the job growth in 2014. Democrats on the Internet relentlessly push these growth rates with typically goofy superlatives like “highest ever” or “highest growth rate in decades.”
So, what did Obama and the Democrats do in 2013 and 2014 that led to the growth we saw last year?
Well, Obama refused to renegotiate with Republicans on any unemployment or budget reforms.
As 2013 ended, we heard Democrats complaining that stingy Republicans were letting federal government extensions of unemployment compensation (which had been re-extended many times) lapse altogether. Obama predicted disaster. The Keynesian economists who circle the Democratic Party like moths to a candle held to a simple prophecy: because of a hit to “aggregate demand,” unemployment would increase.
Instead, in 2014 employment bounced back.
In a droll quasi-opinion piece, “President Costanza’s Jobs Boom,” the Wall Street Journal reports that “job growth in 2014 was roughly 25 percent higher than any post-2009 year. Joblessness plunged to 5.6 percent from 6.7 percent. Net job creation averaged 246,000 a month.”
Citing a National Bureau of Economic Research study by economists Marcus Hagedorn, Iourii Manovskii and Kurt Mitman, which treated the abrupt policy change as a “natural experiment,” the Journal reveled in the knowledge that the increase in incentives from lapsed benefits led unemployed workers to (gasp!) seek jobs.
And they found them. Granted, many of the new jobs are not as good as their pre-bust jobs. But they are jobs, which is better than nothing.
So when your big-government promoting friends attribute 2014’s job growth to Democratic policies, ask which policies, precisely. And ask why Obama’s predictions of 2013 for disaster in 2014 didn’t pan out.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Silver Dollars are back
On Feb. 16, 1878, the Bland-Allison Act, which provided for a return to the minting of silver coins, became U.S. law. Today, the value of American money is secured only by public faith in the stability of the government, but during the 19th Century, money was backed by actual deposits of silver and gold.
Five years earlier, when Congress had stopped buying silver and minting silver coins — following the lead of European nations — a financial panic ensued. Reasons for the suspension, and at the heart of the panic, lay in the fact that the exchange value of silver and gold was fixed at a rate that favored silver producers. Had the United States Treasury let the two standards free float, making a distinction between silver dollars and gold dollars, none of the political strife over bimetallism would have occurred.
In 1893, in the midst of another financial panic, this time as a result of depletion of gold reserves in the U.S. Treasury, President Grover Cleveland called a special session of Congress to repeal the bimetallic standard. He was successful, though agrarian inflationists took over the Democratic Party and offered up, for the next election, William Jennings “Cross of Gold” Bryan as a counter to Cleveland’s old-fashioned fiscal conservative/social liberalism.
Grover Cleveland
The people of the United States are entitled to a sound and stable currency and to money recognized as such on every exchange and in every market of the world.
Remember the Maine
On Feb. 15, 1898, the USS Maine, a battleship, exploded in the Cuba’s Havana harbor, killing 260 American sailors. An official U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry ruled in March 1898 that the ship was blown up by a mine, without directly blaming Spain. Nonetheless, Congress declared war and, within three months, the U.S. had decisively defeated Spanish forces. On December 12, 1898, the Treaty of Paris was signed between the U.S. and Spain, granting the United States its first overseas empire with the ceding of such former Spanish possessions as Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. In 1976, a team of American naval investigators concluded that the Maine explosion was likely caused by a fire that ignited its ammunition stocks, not by a Spanish mine or act of sabotage.
For our Townhall readers, an expansion on a theme from last week: the nature of interventionism.
Click on over, then come back here for more reading. Or, perhaps, discussion. And caution: concentration and “too big to fail” are not the only problems that are emerging in the wake of Dodd-Frank. As suggested in the Whac-A-Mole game, problems keep on coming.
- “Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act” (Wikipedia)
- “The State and Fate of Community Banking,” by Marshall Lux and Robert Greene (Harvard Kennedy School)
- “New study finds that Dodd-Frank has promoted industry consolidation and killed community banks,” by Todd Zywicki (Washington Post)
- Critique of Interventionism, by Ludwig von Mises
- Whac-A-Mole (Wikipedia)
- “Dodd-Frank Law: Regulations Won’t Fix What’s Wrong,” by Frank Calabria (The Philadelphia Inquirer, December 6, 2011)
- “The Big Flaws in Dodd-Frank,” by Gene Epstein (Barron’s)
- “Dodd-Frank: What It Does and Why It’s Flawed,” (Mercatus report, PDF, edited by Hester Peirce and James Broughel)
- “Four Years of Dodd-Frank Damage,” by Peter J. Wallisson (Wall Street Journal)
