Categories
obituary

Barbara Branden (1929–2013)

Barbara Branden died last week in her 85th year.

A writer with a devoted following, Ms. Branden published many articles over the years — on politics, economics, literature, film, methods of clear thinking, smoking and other subjects — and was a popular public speaker, impressing audiences with what Stephen Cox calls her “charm and personal persuasiveness.” But she was best known for her acclaimed 1986 biography The Passion of Ayn Rand. The book was recently published in a Kindle ebook edition, and Barbara emailed an enthusiastic announcement to friends and colleagues.

Passion tells the story of the famous novelist and philosopher (1905–1982) whose novel Atlas Shrugged has been getting even more attention in recent years — thanks to cinematic adaptations and, not least, parallels between Rand’s dystopian tale and political horrors of the present era.

Ms. Branden (then Weidman) approached the Russian émigré as an enthusiastic admirer of the elder author’s second novel, The Fountainhead. She quickly became Rand’s close friend, an integral part of a tumultuous inner circle. She co-wrote an early biographical treatment, Who Is Ayn Rand?, in 1962, and maintained close business and personal ties until a traumatic parting of the ways six years later over a love triangle — or, more properly, rectangle.

No wonder, then, that Barbara said that for many years she had been unsure that she could tackle such a project objectively. Only when she felt that she had come to terms with her tumultuous years with Rand (she met her mentor only once after their break) did she write the book that only she could write.

An admirable thing, to rise above bitterness.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Thought

John Jay

Those who own the country ought to govern it.

Categories
Today

December 15, Bill of Rights goes into effect

On December 15, 1791, the United States Bill of Rights became federal law when ratified by the Virginia General Assembly. On December 15 in 1933 , the Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution officially became effective, repealing the Eighteenth Amendment (and the enabling Volstead Act) that had prohibited the sale, manufacture, and transportation of alcohol.

December 15 birthdays include that of Pehr Evind Svinhufvud af Qvalstad, 1861, first head of state of independent Finland, strongly anti-Communist.

Categories
links

Townhall: Income, Inequality, Insanity

Envy is all the rage. That is, on the left end of the political divide, complaining about “inequality” is on the rise. Why? What does this mean?

Over at Townhall, I make a few forays into that territory. Click on over. Come back here, mainly to contemplate . . . what I didn’t consider: the statistics. The actual nature of inequality.

Categories
by Paul Jacob initiative, referendum, and recall video

Video: Paul Jacob on Nelson Mandela and Peaceful Change

This was recorded a few weeks ago, before the death of Nelson Mandela:

Categories
Thought

John Jay

The jury has the right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy.

Categories
ballot access links media and media people

NOT on Townhall: In Defense of “Spoilers”

The place of minor parties — challenger parties — in American politics needs to be rethought.

Last weekend I wrote one of my regular columns for Townhall.com. I considered what the Libertarian Party challenge means to limited-government folks in the Republican Party. Unfortunately, while I was told they would be publishing that column, it has still not been. 

That’s a first. I’ve been writing a regular column, finalizing it every Saturday (minus one or two vacations) since late 2003. And even when I’ve criticized conservatives, the good folks at Townhall have been kind enough published my words. This time, well, maybe it’s a horrible column. You tell me. Click on over to the column at my archive on this Common Sense site, and then come back here and give me your opinion.

Now, I understand that this is a somewhat controversial issue.

Voting, after all, is a tricky business, with one’s choices very limited. Voting for the lesser of evils might (a) prevent an awful lot of extra evil, or (b) endorse, as a self-fulfilling prophecy, an outcome that guarantees (at least some degree of) malevolence.

Since I believe most of us when we cast our ballot are making the best choices we can to protect ourselves from an oppressive government, I’m not quick to find fault — either with those voting against the worst evil or those opting for the candidate best representing their principles, regardless of the chance to win.

But I do find fault in the attitude that says folks are foolish if they don’t vote for a candidate with whom they have major disagreements, your preferred candidate, instead of a candidate they enthusiastically endorse, because they should despise the other guy even more. If Republicans want Libertarian, or small-l libertarian votes, they’ll have to actually earn them.

“I get that libertarianism is not Republicanism,” writes Carrie Sheffield at Forbes. “But in a two-party, winner-take-all system (for better or worse, that’s just the reality), it begs the question why someone committed to a small-government philosophy would knowingly generate a big-government winner.”

But aren’t those who nominate a Republican candidate unable to win the libertarian votes needed to prevail in the election just as culpable in generating “a big-government winner” as the libertarians who decline to vote for that GOP candidate?

And certainly my suggestion, late in my column, shows a way around the problem. The problem, as it is right now, is that “the best” (the Libertarian Party? — yes, for some of us) serves as the enemy of the “good” (or at least “better than the Democrat”). By altering the manner in which we cast and count ballots — whether IRV or proportional representation, or something similar — the best will not work against the “good enough.”

It seems like an idea whose time has come.

This is especially droll since the mathematician who first spotted the problem, French philosopher Condorcet, did so before the drawing up of the Constitution of the United States. Perhaps its time for a revolution in our heads, or a new rethink of democracy. You know, to make it more, not less democratic; more, not less, republican.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

And these links provide some additional food for thought:

Categories
Today

Dec. 13, George

On December 13, 1920, American economist, statesman, and 60th United States Secretary of State George Shultz was born.

Categories
Thought

John Jay

The only way to be loved is to be and to appear lovely; to possess and display kindness, benevolence, tenderness; to be free from selfishness and to be alive to the welfare of others.

Categories
free trade & free markets insider corruption

Copper Tubes in Alabama

You’ve gotta be somewhere, so you might as well choose where that somewhere is in a non-random fashion.

That seems to be the rule.

One consequences of this is that we now have local government officials and functionaries jet-setting the world promoting their towns, counties, cities . . . their hills and their dales.

A fascinating report from The Economist tells how the mayor of Thomasville, Alabama, came to sit in a north China pipe-factory canteen talking up his town. “Sheldon Day was there to drum up investment,” the report explains. “Two years ago he convinced another Chinese company, which makes copper tubes, to build its first American factory in the county next door. The plant will create around 300 jobs when it opens next year. Mr Day wants more.”

It’s a charming tale, even if “the battle for Chinese attention” be “fierce.” And risky:

The mayor of Farmer City, Illinois, cancelled his plans after residents expressed anger at the idea of using city money to woo foreign businesses. Chad Auer, a mayor in a right-wing bit of Colorado, had to take to YouTube to explain that when Richard Nixon went to China in 1972, it turned out to be worth his while.

Nixonian prudence aside, there’s an even darker aspect to this practice: Bending over backwards to entice businesses to an area . . . at the expense of existing businesses, residents, and any concept of equality before the law.

I refer, of course, to “tax incentives,” loopholes, tax credits, regulatory workarounds, and the like.

Fine, you pillars of society, going off promoting your town — so long as no special deals are made.

But make special enticements, and you morph from “seller” of community to “sell-out.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.