—
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
Categories
Remember June 4
Tag: freedom
Categories
Remember June 4
Remember Tiananmen Square
What is the Libertarian Party up to in inviting former President Donald John Trump to address the party’s upcoming national convention ?
The goal of this “third party” may be crystalline in its clarity — a free society as understood by Libertarians — but how this can be achieved by running candidates for office in Partisan Duopoly America is murky at best. The number of self-identified libertarians in the country is small, though polling in the 1990s suggested that about a quarter of the population is of a general libertarian mindset: minimal government; private property; personal freedom as the tolerant community’s ideal; individual responsibility as the chief form of
The difference between a self-identified Libertarian and a libertarian-ish citizen at large can be huge, in some ways: no taxes versus lower taxes, for example. These positions play dramatically differently, of course, in elections where most voters are not libertarian at all.
The 2024 convention will be held May 23 – 26 in Washington, D.C. (of all places). And Donald Trump (of all people) has accepted the invitation to speak (offered to both he and President Biden). The party is shilling registrations for the event by telling prospects that only registered attendees will be able to cast their votes to establish “the topics President Trump will address during his time at the podium.”*
As a newsworthy event, this is one of the party’s best stunts. The very idea of inviting the presumptive Republican nominee to speak is … weird. And, therefore, newsworthy. It might make for an apocalyptic event — encompassing every meaning of “apocalyptic.”
The convention itself is titled, in traditionally flagrant Libertarian fashion, “Become Ungovernable.” While Libertarians mean this slogan in a good (and peaceful) way, its ambiguity and alarming nature is one of many reasons Libertarians get low vote totals.
Trump addressing Libertarians could suggest a more negative interpretation
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
* Good luck with that.
Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly
—
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
What happened in Brussels?
“In Brussels, in the heart of the European Union, in a western liberal democracy, we’re unable to have a conversation about identity, migration, borders, family, and security without facing attempts to have it shut down,” says Matt Goodwin, a British professor.
The mayor of a Brussels district, Emir Kir, had ordered the shutdown of the National Conservatism Conference in order, he said, to “guarantee public safety.”
But Kir also stated the real reason, that in his neck of the woods “the far right is not welcome.” He apparently disagrees with viewpoints to be elaborated at
Police took steps to stymie would-be attendees.
Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orbán said: “The last time they wanted to silence me with the police was when the Communists set them on me in ’88. We didn’t give up then and we will not give up this
This is a more open targeting of political speech than erasing the “misinformation” of social media posts. Does it signal a new strategy
Hard to say. The immediate reaction of other European politicians, including many on the left, was dismay and shock that anybody would attempt such a thing.
“Banning political meetings is unconstitutional. Full stop,” proclaims the Belgian
“Extremely disturbing,” says a British spokesman.
Could be sincere; could be a realization that “Uh oh, we’ve gone too far”; could be a mixture of both.
The next question: will it happen again?
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly
—
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
Can J. K. Rowling destroy Scotland’s new anti-free-speech law with a strategic wave of a single wand?
The author of the Harry Potter and Cormoran Strike series has gotten into trouble. She defied the State by saying that men are men and women are women even when a member of one of these sexes
To some, the author’s statements are “hate” speech. Speech now prosecutable in Scotland, where
On April 1, 2024, legislation went into effect there making it a criminal offense to “stir up hate” against members of a protected group, including transgender individuals. This is a “crime” that can be punished by up to seven years in prison.
The law’s terms are encompassing
So far, Rowling has escaped arrest, though offering herself as the subject of a test case. After the law went into effect, she penned a series of posts declaring that various men who say they’re not men are in fact men: blatant “misgendering.”
“If what I’ve written here qualifies as an offence under the terms of the new act, I look forward to being arrested,” she wrote.
When the Scottish police declined, she added: “I trust that all women — irrespective of profile or financial means — will be treated equally under the law.
This trust is, I fear, misplaced. As long as the law exists, Rowling’s very visible defiance cannot protect everybody else who might be targeted under it.
Scotland needs more Harry Potters, er, heroes … to stand up to this terrible law.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly
—
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
Fear was a major theme — and ploy — during the pandemic. But it’s looking now like the people we have been told to rely upon for our safety are themselves moved by fear. They’re cowards, poltroons.
The Centers for Disease Control wrote an alert in the thick of 2021’s “vaccine” rollout, warning of the dangers of the Moderna and Pfizer jabs.
It was never sent out.
“In the May 25, 2021, email, exclusively obtained by The Epoch Times, a CDC official revealed why some officials were against sending the alert,” explains Zachary Stieber. You see, while an alert to health care professionals using the official Health Area Network system made complete sense, one CDC official gave a clue to her colleagues’ hesitance: “people don’t want to appear alarmist,” you see.
What did we who took the jab risk? Heart inflammation, or myocarditis. The CDC knew this early on.
But did not warn us.
Now, from listening to Dr. John Campbell on YouTube and Rumble, we have learned a lot more (if not in time in 2021) about the myocarditis threat. The takers of the modRNA treatment who are most at risk are those who engage in strenuous exercise soon after inoculation (which explains why the bulk of the afflicted have been boys and young men in the prime of life). Or so I last heard. I am certainly no doctor; I merely rely upon doctors to advise me.
And those doctors, in turn, rely upon official sources of information like the CDC.
Who did not advise them properly.
Who worry too much about “appearing alarmist” and not enough about relaying the best information.
Poltroons!
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly
—
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)