Hm, the first two links here have been lying around for five years; guess I ought to shove them out.
Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry on restructuring the banks
“Zomia”, a large region in Asia that was effectively stateless until recently
James Leroy Wilson on The Limits of Utilitarianism. The payoff is near the bottom.
belief in one’s own immortality is immature
Would not a government prudently looking to the wellbeing of its people, like a prudent parent, encourage the people to learn to provide for themselves in its absence – i.e., encourage private provision of vital services – rather than risk sudden failure of those services in some political crisis?
A free market would not say to the poor, “It’s cute that you want to earn money by providing a service, but first we need you to save up for a license.”
Of course! Why didn’t we think of that?
The second-weirdest argument for statism that I’ve heard is: “We are social animals!” … implying, I guess, that if not for the constant threat of force we would not behave according to our nature.
The weirdest (which I’ve only heard twice) is: “There are always some people who will seek to dominate others, and there needs to be a structure to facilitate that ambition.”
To admit white privilege is to admit a stake, however small, in ongoing injustice. It’s to see a world different than your previous perception. Acknowledging that your own group enjoys social and economic benefits of systemic racism is frightening and uncomfortable.
She lists a bunch of ugly things that are unlikely to happen to her sons, as well as some offensive things not said to her by the ignorant, thanks to their blondness.
What’s missing from the piece is any description of “benefits” — any reason to believe that we as Whites would be any worse off if, for example, the Blue Gang were to stop abusing Blacks.
Not being murdered by cops is not a “privilege”. Nobody ever said, “Let’s organize and arm a gang of bullies so that they can spend their days not murdering our kind of people.” Absence of SWAT raids is the state of nature, not an artificial benefit.
Fred Pohl two years ago: None of the four leading Republican presidential candidates is acceptable, because none has a plan to deal with global warming. Obama “is the only remaining hope we have”; he has no plan either, “but his options are still open.”
Roderick Long defines right-conflationism as defending existing economic structures as if they were outcomes of a genuinely free market (what Kevin Carson calls vulgar libertarianism), and left-conflationism as using those outcomes to attack the concept of free markets. I hope my paraphrasing doesn’t offend either of them.
Left-conflationism asks us to believe that Big Business, through its corrupt control of legislatures, prevents political interference in the market and goes no further; that mere market freedom allows it to loot us so thoroughly that it does not seek subsidies or protection from competition.