In Mexico the death toll keeps raising from the drug war and that blood is not only on the hands of the direct murderers, the real culprit is, of course, the government that is responsible for the raging war and people dying because of the law. If they were to legalize drugs, nothing of this would happen. As usual governments do the complete opposite of what they ought to be doing.
Monday, July 13, 2009
The future of movies
What the executives of a decaying Hollywood want to stop is not only the free information flow or people actually judging them online, no; they also want to stop the next step in the entertainment industry. There are already people writing books online, some even inviting others to take part in the writing. I have also noticed that the development of software with open codes is still growing, despite different governments best efforts. Thanks to another blogger (countingcats) I stubble upon this little masterpiece: IRON SKY.
This is, in my mind, the future of the movie business, or maybe even the future of all culture. I have been thinking about writing a book and have come very far with the planning and even written a couple of chapters, but I think that instead of going to a publisher I will follow these examples and post it online. Watch out for that in the near future, I promise good reading.
This is, in my mind, the future of the movie business, or maybe even the future of all culture. I have been thinking about writing a book and have come very far with the planning and even written a couple of chapters, but I think that instead of going to a publisher I will follow these examples and post it online. Watch out for that in the near future, I promise good reading.
You are going to die! Part XXVII
Drowning is a fun way of going out, don’t you think? Just gobbling on some water, stretch out your hand (preferably above the surface) in a “desperate” gesture and sink towards the bottom. And just like that boy wonder in the Titanic movie you might have the luck of saying goodbye to some sexy beauty before you get eaten by fish. I have also heard that drowning is supposed to be an “easy” way of dying, not so painful, just some panic for a minute or so, depending on your lung capacity. Not really sure how people know this, but I find it kind of comforting.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, in 2005, the United States experienced an average of ten drowning deaths per day (3,582) with an additional 710 people dying from drowning and other causes in boating-related accidents. In Sweden, according to the Swedish life saving society, between 100-135 people drown each year and most of those are men and for some reason half of those males dies with the zipper in their pants wide open. Go figure. The statistic shows about the same ratio of drowning deaths each year and the percentage is about the same in most countries. I have mentioned water before as a main killer of humans and water is also one main feature in our houses (the worst place that exist!) which leads to electrocutions, slipping in the shower and other hilarious events. But drowning deserves its own posting, not only because it kills tens of thousands of people each year (much worse then 25 outbreaks of the Piggy Flu!), but also because drowning is neglected area that is not very restricted. In a world were politicians all need to show how much they care about their constituency, it is kind of strange that no one has picked up this as a general phenomenon. Sure some politicians want us to learn how to swim and consequently steal our money to pay some teacher that can learn us this arduous skill, and sure some politicians might appear in the news after some boat has sunk to tell us how sorry he/she is and that the government will do everything in its power (including stealing more money) to get to the bottom of that disaster, but drowning in general is an overlooked issue. Why isn’t there taxation on bathing for instance? How come there is no law against lazing around in the bathtub? Shouldn’t there be a law forbidding us getting to close to water? And where are the anti-water organizations? I want demonstrations against this dreaded fiend God damn it!
Also, it has to be mentioned, some assassins use water as a way of covering up their crimes. Did Mrs Marshal, your neighbour, really drown by herself or was it her daughter going after that elusive inheritance? The old hag refused to die for so long, why should she suddenly croc in the bathtub? These sorts of questions should be asked and please do me a favour, the next time you go near water or drink a glass, please reconsider, it might just be what it wants!
In Sweden, a country that rarely experience any kind of disasters (there is no volcanoes, hurricanes or earthquakes destroying Swedish cities), there is today flooding going on in some parts. Journalists, hardly having anything to write during the summer and sensationalists as they all are, smell headlines and presto those “flood-waves” are threatening some crops. Oh, no… They might burst thru a dam! Oh Jesus! And so it goes on. The rain seems to keep falling, water keep threatening cities, umbrellas are selling out and some poor people have water in their living room. How will my birth nation ever recuperate from this massive disaster? I’m just waiting for some tree hugger claiming this is the effects of man-made global warming and I would be very surprised if the news is free from “scientists” claiming polar bears are going extinct and that this is Sweden’s fault. Humans are so funny.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, in 2005, the United States experienced an average of ten drowning deaths per day (3,582) with an additional 710 people dying from drowning and other causes in boating-related accidents. In Sweden, according to the Swedish life saving society, between 100-135 people drown each year and most of those are men and for some reason half of those males dies with the zipper in their pants wide open. Go figure. The statistic shows about the same ratio of drowning deaths each year and the percentage is about the same in most countries. I have mentioned water before as a main killer of humans and water is also one main feature in our houses (the worst place that exist!) which leads to electrocutions, slipping in the shower and other hilarious events. But drowning deserves its own posting, not only because it kills tens of thousands of people each year (much worse then 25 outbreaks of the Piggy Flu!), but also because drowning is neglected area that is not very restricted. In a world were politicians all need to show how much they care about their constituency, it is kind of strange that no one has picked up this as a general phenomenon. Sure some politicians want us to learn how to swim and consequently steal our money to pay some teacher that can learn us this arduous skill, and sure some politicians might appear in the news after some boat has sunk to tell us how sorry he/she is and that the government will do everything in its power (including stealing more money) to get to the bottom of that disaster, but drowning in general is an overlooked issue. Why isn’t there taxation on bathing for instance? How come there is no law against lazing around in the bathtub? Shouldn’t there be a law forbidding us getting to close to water? And where are the anti-water organizations? I want demonstrations against this dreaded fiend God damn it!
Also, it has to be mentioned, some assassins use water as a way of covering up their crimes. Did Mrs Marshal, your neighbour, really drown by herself or was it her daughter going after that elusive inheritance? The old hag refused to die for so long, why should she suddenly croc in the bathtub? These sorts of questions should be asked and please do me a favour, the next time you go near water or drink a glass, please reconsider, it might just be what it wants!
In Sweden, a country that rarely experience any kind of disasters (there is no volcanoes, hurricanes or earthquakes destroying Swedish cities), there is today flooding going on in some parts. Journalists, hardly having anything to write during the summer and sensationalists as they all are, smell headlines and presto those “flood-waves” are threatening some crops. Oh, no… They might burst thru a dam! Oh Jesus! And so it goes on. The rain seems to keep falling, water keep threatening cities, umbrellas are selling out and some poor people have water in their living room. How will my birth nation ever recuperate from this massive disaster? I’m just waiting for some tree hugger claiming this is the effects of man-made global warming and I would be very surprised if the news is free from “scientists” claiming polar bears are going extinct and that this is Sweden’s fault. Humans are so funny.
A look at Libertarianism
Some libertarian bloggers in the UK is writing about and trying to explain libertarianism so I thought I should give my opinion on this subject. As a Swedish refugee in an country (UK) that is going fast downhill with NeuArbeit at the helm I can, in a way, give a perspective as an outsider regardless of being, for the most part, a convinced libertarian. I am, however, no spokesperson for this ideology and as usual I have no intention of convincing anyone about anything. I just see the truth about things and the truth is that there is only one way of really having a free and fair civilization built on justice and that is through the notion of “free from” others.
I started out as a conservative and to a certain extent I still am. I still think that monarchy has its positive attributes; I still think that school uniform is a great idea; I still believe that acknowledging our history and culture together with an in-house spoken language is great building blocks for a society. To some extent I also agree with the conservative (religious) opinion about abortion and general conduct. But – and this to me is the very essence of libertarianism – I would never ever impose my opinions on others. I would never use the law to force people to wear school uniforms. I would never use armed police to steal people’s money to pay for monarchy. These “conservative” opinions are mine, not yours, not everyone’s, just mine. I have no right whatsoever to use the government or the cohesive power of the law to make anyone do anything against their will. This is what libertarianism is to me; free will and the right to choice. No one, no matter how many or how good their arguments are, have the right to force anyone else to do something against their will. In a libertarian society you are your own king, you decide over your life. If you want to believe in Santa, start a rock band or have matching socks it does not matter, your choice. If you are a communist and want to live in a small commune with others like you and live within the confines of the pink shimmering happiness of socialism, go ahead, just don’t force anyone to obey your or your friend’s opinions.
I could also go on about how economy and production increases with a free society, since I’m an economist that would be a good way to go, but that is actually beside the point. The point is that libertarianism means that people are “equal” in the sense that they all have the same rights and that they all are free from others. Libertarianism also means that the law is limited hence easy to understand so the general public actually knows the Do and Don’ts. But perhaps the main point, and the most frightening for those in power, is that libertarianism also means that you are free from the state. A government consists of people, they have no rights that excide those of others in the country and consequently have no right to use force to impose their views. This is why the libertarian movement is so detested by virtually everyone; if they can’t use the mighty armed forces of the government to rule, how can they rule? For those that is reading this and do not have the libertarian persuasion, think really hard about what ideology that is most hated of them all - it is not socialism or fascism - it is libertarianism because this idea challenges the very notion of a ruler.
Some believe (mainly “conservatives” and “liberals”) that what I just said means that libertarianism is same as anarchy, it does not. A libertarian society still have laws, still has a government, still have armed forces, but those are very restricted and have only one basic chore; to protect the individual right to choice. Because even if you have the right to make your own choices, so does everyone else. You have an absolute right to do anything you want until you run into someone with the same absolute right. This means you can never use force, never intimidate or bully another human into accepting your merchandise or your political standpoint. If you do, you are committing a crime and this is when the government steps in. The government’s only legitimate reason to exist is to protect the basic human right of making own decisions.
Another popular attitude towards the basic idea of libertarianism is the socialist standpoint of “We live together and we are a flock animal” – meaning that we need to help out, support our fellow man, assist the needy. Firstly there is nothing in libertarianism that contradicts this, if people want to help each other, go ahead, that’s your choice. If you want to give away all your money to charity, do it, nothing is stopping you. However, this most be each and everyone’s free choice. If you, however, use the almighty state to force people to “help” it is not true philanthropy, it is not solidarity, it is only people under duress getting forced to “help”. When the socialist say “we need to show solidarity” what he/she really means is “We need to force people to help other people” never telling you who is who. One always need to ask the question “why?”. Why should we help only this group? Why do my neighbour need government support but not I? And who is really “poor”? Who is rich? What do people really need? What can people actually do? These questions needs to be answered for socialism to have the slightest chance of working, but they can’t be answered which is one reason why socialism never have and never will work. Libertarianism, however, does nothing of the sort, this ideology do not judge people. You can be white, black, old, young, male, female, “rich” or “poor”, it has no relevance. The only thing that matters in the basic concept; the idea of making your own choices. In this sense libertarianism is also the only none-judgemental and only none-racist ideology that exists. All other political views take a stand for environmentalist groups, bankers, the workers, the industry, farmers, white people, black people or anything else that might suit a particular view in order to win votes.
The last thing I want to comment on, and the main reason why libertarianism do not attract the large masses, is the consequence of making your own choice. Because this also means you are liable for what happens. There is no scapegoat. You cannot blame the Jews, the rich, the society or your neighbour for your failures; the failures are yours and nobody else’s. You are your own king, but you are also your own biggest adversary. And since we all know we all make bad decisions, this is a big stone to carry. If your business goes down, you were not good enough, simple as that. Most people don’t like this, they do not want to blame themselves; they want to blame someone else. Also people like to have someone else to make decision for them, people think it is easier or that those elected might know better. So called “experts” thrives everywhere around us telling us everything from what to eat to what to think. The hardest obstacle for libertarians is - according to me - how to teach people to think, act and do things by, for and off themselves. I also would argue that this is the main reason why so many believe in stateism and/or socialism, because spokespersons of the lefties promise everything and say they will make things “easier”. Why choice a phone company when a politician can do it for you? Why choice where to live when governments obviously knows best? People have been fooled to believe that the smuggest best-spoken voice trying to get their vote is the best one to make choices for them. We do not go to the most articulate doctor when our leg is broken, we do not go to the best speaking dentist to fix our teethes, but somehow we think that a well dressed person with a name on a ballot that can talk bureaucratic can fix our lives.
The economic argument is completely on libertarians side, so is the moral one, but until this ideology can convince people that making their own choices is not only the most beneficial for themselves, but also for society as a whole, and as long as people think they can get something for free without paying for it several times over, the libertarian movement will never triumph. This struggle is hard and is made even harder by journalists, “thinkers” and indoctrinating schools. I don’t think we will ever see a truly free society, people are too stupid or to occupied with their useless lives to even consider it, but maybe there is a chance in the aftermath of the current depression. Maybe more people will see through the smoke and realize that bail-out money, stimulus money and every government program for the people is all paid for by the people. Maybe citizens will realize that every time a politician promises them something, the people themselves are the ones paying for it. I hope so, I don’t think so, but I hope.
I started out as a conservative and to a certain extent I still am. I still think that monarchy has its positive attributes; I still think that school uniform is a great idea; I still believe that acknowledging our history and culture together with an in-house spoken language is great building blocks for a society. To some extent I also agree with the conservative (religious) opinion about abortion and general conduct. But – and this to me is the very essence of libertarianism – I would never ever impose my opinions on others. I would never use the law to force people to wear school uniforms. I would never use armed police to steal people’s money to pay for monarchy. These “conservative” opinions are mine, not yours, not everyone’s, just mine. I have no right whatsoever to use the government or the cohesive power of the law to make anyone do anything against their will. This is what libertarianism is to me; free will and the right to choice. No one, no matter how many or how good their arguments are, have the right to force anyone else to do something against their will. In a libertarian society you are your own king, you decide over your life. If you want to believe in Santa, start a rock band or have matching socks it does not matter, your choice. If you are a communist and want to live in a small commune with others like you and live within the confines of the pink shimmering happiness of socialism, go ahead, just don’t force anyone to obey your or your friend’s opinions.
I could also go on about how economy and production increases with a free society, since I’m an economist that would be a good way to go, but that is actually beside the point. The point is that libertarianism means that people are “equal” in the sense that they all have the same rights and that they all are free from others. Libertarianism also means that the law is limited hence easy to understand so the general public actually knows the Do and Don’ts. But perhaps the main point, and the most frightening for those in power, is that libertarianism also means that you are free from the state. A government consists of people, they have no rights that excide those of others in the country and consequently have no right to use force to impose their views. This is why the libertarian movement is so detested by virtually everyone; if they can’t use the mighty armed forces of the government to rule, how can they rule? For those that is reading this and do not have the libertarian persuasion, think really hard about what ideology that is most hated of them all - it is not socialism or fascism - it is libertarianism because this idea challenges the very notion of a ruler.
Some believe (mainly “conservatives” and “liberals”) that what I just said means that libertarianism is same as anarchy, it does not. A libertarian society still have laws, still has a government, still have armed forces, but those are very restricted and have only one basic chore; to protect the individual right to choice. Because even if you have the right to make your own choices, so does everyone else. You have an absolute right to do anything you want until you run into someone with the same absolute right. This means you can never use force, never intimidate or bully another human into accepting your merchandise or your political standpoint. If you do, you are committing a crime and this is when the government steps in. The government’s only legitimate reason to exist is to protect the basic human right of making own decisions.
Another popular attitude towards the basic idea of libertarianism is the socialist standpoint of “We live together and we are a flock animal” – meaning that we need to help out, support our fellow man, assist the needy. Firstly there is nothing in libertarianism that contradicts this, if people want to help each other, go ahead, that’s your choice. If you want to give away all your money to charity, do it, nothing is stopping you. However, this most be each and everyone’s free choice. If you, however, use the almighty state to force people to “help” it is not true philanthropy, it is not solidarity, it is only people under duress getting forced to “help”. When the socialist say “we need to show solidarity” what he/she really means is “We need to force people to help other people” never telling you who is who. One always need to ask the question “why?”. Why should we help only this group? Why do my neighbour need government support but not I? And who is really “poor”? Who is rich? What do people really need? What can people actually do? These questions needs to be answered for socialism to have the slightest chance of working, but they can’t be answered which is one reason why socialism never have and never will work. Libertarianism, however, does nothing of the sort, this ideology do not judge people. You can be white, black, old, young, male, female, “rich” or “poor”, it has no relevance. The only thing that matters in the basic concept; the idea of making your own choices. In this sense libertarianism is also the only none-judgemental and only none-racist ideology that exists. All other political views take a stand for environmentalist groups, bankers, the workers, the industry, farmers, white people, black people or anything else that might suit a particular view in order to win votes.
The last thing I want to comment on, and the main reason why libertarianism do not attract the large masses, is the consequence of making your own choice. Because this also means you are liable for what happens. There is no scapegoat. You cannot blame the Jews, the rich, the society or your neighbour for your failures; the failures are yours and nobody else’s. You are your own king, but you are also your own biggest adversary. And since we all know we all make bad decisions, this is a big stone to carry. If your business goes down, you were not good enough, simple as that. Most people don’t like this, they do not want to blame themselves; they want to blame someone else. Also people like to have someone else to make decision for them, people think it is easier or that those elected might know better. So called “experts” thrives everywhere around us telling us everything from what to eat to what to think. The hardest obstacle for libertarians is - according to me - how to teach people to think, act and do things by, for and off themselves. I also would argue that this is the main reason why so many believe in stateism and/or socialism, because spokespersons of the lefties promise everything and say they will make things “easier”. Why choice a phone company when a politician can do it for you? Why choice where to live when governments obviously knows best? People have been fooled to believe that the smuggest best-spoken voice trying to get their vote is the best one to make choices for them. We do not go to the most articulate doctor when our leg is broken, we do not go to the best speaking dentist to fix our teethes, but somehow we think that a well dressed person with a name on a ballot that can talk bureaucratic can fix our lives.
The economic argument is completely on libertarians side, so is the moral one, but until this ideology can convince people that making their own choices is not only the most beneficial for themselves, but also for society as a whole, and as long as people think they can get something for free without paying for it several times over, the libertarian movement will never triumph. This struggle is hard and is made even harder by journalists, “thinkers” and indoctrinating schools. I don’t think we will ever see a truly free society, people are too stupid or to occupied with their useless lives to even consider it, but maybe there is a chance in the aftermath of the current depression. Maybe more people will see through the smoke and realize that bail-out money, stimulus money and every government program for the people is all paid for by the people. Maybe citizens will realize that every time a politician promises them something, the people themselves are the ones paying for it. I hope so, I don’t think so, but I hope.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)