“Avatar”, James Cameron’s triumph of 3D visuals over 2D story and characters, has been described as a searing sci-fi indictment of capitalism. So much so, that the Free Agent’s friends and family have been turning cyber-eyes her way for an expected dissection and rebuttal. Well, I finally saw it a week ago, and all I can say is . . . it’s not capitalism.
The story follows a ruthless company’s war on the peaceful (aren’t they all?) indigenous population of planet Pandora. At stake is a deposit of subtly named unobtanium, the “sky people” need it to survive, the gentle, wise, culturally rich (aren’t they all?) Na’vi have it. During the opening half-hour of clunky exposition, we learn that the company has tried to buy or trade for unobtanium, but since the Na’vi live in harmony with nature and have all they need (of course), they have asked the sky people to beat it. Instead, the ruthless capitalists have built a vast crypto-military-anthropological city, the only traces of the Twentieth Century being slang (“you got no skilz!”) and a book of matches.
That’s a big investment for a company that seems to have exhausted its prospects of obtaining the unobtainiumable, unless, of course, they can also bring guns to the negotiation. Here’s where Cameron’s carefully crafted language—this is a private company, he tells us, these are hired mercenaries, not Marines, despite the usual ‘get some!’ jargon—looses, rather than makes, the case against capitalism. In a free market, if the gentle, wise, culturally rich, etc., locals won’t trade you the goods, your alternatives are to up your offer or go elsewhere. But on Pandora, essential elements of capitalism—property rights, free exchange, and pricing mechanisms—are totally absent. Coke can’t put a gun to your head to get you to drink soda, only thieves and governments take what they want by force.
So apart from the technological achievement, which I look forward to seeing put to better use, all Cameron succeeds in proving over the course of two hours and forty-two minutes is that it’s wrong to kill people for their property. The Free Agent agrees.
No Free Market on Pandora
February 9, 2010 by Janet HopfHelp Defeat Bad Vaccine Bills in Albany Tomorrow
February 8, 2010 by Jim LesczynskiThe Coalition for Informed Choice has issued an urgent action alert regarding a vote tomorrow on draconian vaccine legislation working its way through Albany.
S4779 and A6702 would permit all present and future vaccines and drugs for sexually transmitted diseases to be given to New York children without parental consent. The Senate codes committee is expected to vote on the bill on Tuesday.
If this legislation is enacted, parents would be replaced by school administrators and public health bureaucrats as the key decision-makers regarding their children’s health care.
If a child has a drug or vaccine reaction, the parents won’t know
what is happening or how to help. Anonymous vaccine administrators don’t know the child’s medical history, vaccine contraindications, allergies, and past vaccine reactions.
Keep in mind that these bills apply to all children, with no age limit. Theoretically, bureaucrats would have the green light to start administering STD vaccines in kindergarten.
Another Assembly bill, A778, makes HPV vaccines mandatory for all New York children beginning in the sixth grade. Keep in mind that HPV is only a risk if the child is sexually active. Fortunately, there is no “same as” bill in the Senate, so this legislation is less of an immediate threat.
Contact your state senators and assembly members today, and let them know you oppose these draconian, authoritarian bills.
The Sons of Liberty: Terrorists or Citizen Soldiers
February 5, 2010 by Ron MooreEveryday as I walk into my office at 55 Broad Street I glance over at a plaque commemorating Marinus Willet who on June 6th, 1775 along with a small group of men seized five wagonloads of arms from British Troops evacuating New York City. The men were members of the Sons of Liberty, a group considered “seditious radicals” by respectable people of the time.
Who were these men who took it on themselves to confront the Authorities? Who put them in charge and who did they represent? I asked those questions of Adam Platka, who did his dissertation on that subject. Here is some of what he said:
Over the past twelve months the country has been rocked by mass protests and town-hall rage from a spreading movement called the Tea Party. From small towns to the largest of cities, this grass-roots movement has exploded in revolt of President Obama’s health care agenda and economic policies. They have even gained enough traction to hold, starting today, the inaugural National Tea Party Convention in efforts to consolidate leadership, philosophy, and the nuts and bolts of a working political organization that will run individuals for office in the up coming midterm elections.
As their name suggests, they strive to embody the originally ideas and actions carried out in Boston in the cold of December 1773. It was there that members of Massachusetts Sons of Liberty, under the cover of night, dumped three shiploads of tea into the harbor in revolt of the Tea Act – a tax enacted by the British Parliament on the colonies without representation of the colonies themselves.
Though the Boston Tea Party itself is an iconic event of American history and frequent reference of political protest – it brings into question whether this act and the other aggressive mob actions taken by the Sons of Liberty in the lead up to the American Revolution were truly revolutionary acts or acts of terrorism.
Join us On Monday, February 8th, at the Manhattan Libertarian monthly meeting where Adam Platka will lead a discussion that will focus on how the Sons of Liberty were formed and how it’s unique leadership and actions directly led to the revolution. He will touch on whether the Sons of Liberty actions, ranging from pamphleteering, aggressive mobs and the famous Boston tea party, were true revolutionary acts or acts terrorism. And lastly, discuss the comparisons between the Sons of Liberty and today’s Tea Partiers and weather they are staying true to the founders’ ideas.
Get details here.
Bring Your Politics to Work Day: Curt Monash on Database Snooping
February 4, 2010 by Ron MooreI’ve never been one to keep quiet about my politics – much to the dismay and horror of many of my Leftist friends. It usually doesn’t take too long for my business associates, customers and vendors to get the message either. It probably costs me some business but the alternative costs me something a lot more dear.
That’s why I have to applaud Curt Monash, who’s February 2nd Blog in Intelligent Enterprise seeks to raise awareness of Database Snooping as a threat to liberty.
Monash’s company, surprisingly named Monash Research, is in the business of predicting the future effects of technological trends. So he makes a living thinking about this stuff .
Monash does something controversial. He calls on us geeks to take on some political responsibility. That is, to think about something besides our paychecks. In his post he says…
- Database and analytic technology, as they evolve, will pose tremendous danger to individual liberties.
- We in the industry who are creating this problem also have a duty to help fix it.
We should apply personal ethics to our work? What a concept!
He goes on to make specific suggestions about needed legal restrictions and even considers the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments. He even mentions the Ninth and Tenth Amendment – imagine that.
Here are his “four pillars of liberty in an information age” taken from what he calls his best writing about the subject of liberty.
- Reading and writing should be unrestricted, with only the narrowest of exceptions. Almost all forms of censorship are wrongful and dangerous. And while it may not be possible to win every battle about pictures, videos, and the like, there’s no reason to tolerate the slightest censorship when what’s being censored is simply words.
- “State of mind” evidence inferred from – for example – logs of search or surfing behavior should be inadmissible in legal proceedings, investigations, and hiring decisions. Whether it’s your interest in Islam, pornography, or the untraceable disposal of corpses, what you look into shouldn’t get you into trouble. Yes, there are a few cases where forgoing such tools is regrettable. But the slippery-slope dangers are far too great to make relying on them worth the risk and cost. The Petrick case is a dangerous precedent.
- All uses of data that are not explicitly permitted to government must be forbidden. Given how many gray areas get created by technological advancement, a catch-all rule like this seems crucial. Analogies to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments are not coincidental.
- All government programs (with only the narrowest of security exceptions) that use data should be disclosed. Even the narrow security exceptions should be subject to separation-of-powers oversight. David Brin and the Dutch government both have some good ideas along those lines.
You should read both blogs. There are a lot of great links to other work of his and some interesting court cases.
But the real message in his blog is that our work can be more than a cash machine. For many of us our work is more than what we do. For many of us our work is who we are. We aren’t much if we aren’t principled.
Senate confirms Bernanke and the Shadow Government
January 29, 2010 by Ron MooreThere can’t be a better poster child for back room sleazy deals and elitist government than Ben Bernanke. Stubbornly sticking to his position that the U.S. Congress and the people can’t handle the truth about who has their hands in the people’s cookie jar has got him into some trouble from all parts of the political spectrum. Unfortunately not enough trouble to prevent another 7 years his mismanagement and corruption.
First, to those who argue that he prevented an even worse disaster - it’s impossible to prove that one way or the other so it amounts to your opinion. And it’s an opinion with no evidence to support it – and tons of evidence to the contrary. I’ll be glad to debate that in another blog but in this one I want to look at the votes.
Bernanke Vote Analysis
This vote was not overwhelmingly partisan. The Dems and the GOP both sold you out. It’s no surprise that Vermont’s Bernie Sanders voted no. He’s been a critic Bernanke and a supporter of transparency. Connecticut’s Lieberman is the ID (Independent Democrat) voting Yes. For those of you who cling to the idea that the Republicans are our best hope for freedom might want to note that 22 Republicans voted for the Shadow Government. Here is the list.
Republican Votes to Confirm Bernanke
Here is the list of those who voted Yes and who are coming up for re-election this year. There are 12 Democrats and 8 Republicans. Let’s defeat them all. As consolation to the Republicans that would reduce the Dem’s’ majority.
Voted for Bernanke with Election in 2010
Note: I have one or two questions regarding retirements and special elections that might result in errors. My apologies. I’d appreciate corrections and criticisms. )
Governor David Paterson’s Mystery Woman and the New York State Budget
January 19, 2010 by Ron MooreAre you kidding?
New York State has a $7 billion budget deficit. Paterson is the only major party politician who has shown any leadership in addressing the deficit. And the press gives legs to a highly questionable story about Paterson’s personal business with a woman who didn’t complain – even if the incident happened at all. Based on an article I read yesterday, the manager of the restaurant said he walked passed the table constantly and saw no such behavior and the two women who made the accusation apparently refused to stand by their accusation.
My question is which deficit is bigger? The NYS budget deficits or the brain deficit exhibited by the media and the NYS Democrats?
You KNOW where this is coming from. Paterson’s enemies on the New York State public spending gravy train can’t possibly let any shred of fiscal responsibility go unpunished. The mere suggestion that the blood suckers in Albany shouldn’t drain their victims quite so fast prompts them to repudiate their incumbent and replace him with another in a hereditary line of ultra-tax-and-spenders. Good thinking Dems. When you have a disaster – double down on the actions that created it. Raise taxes in the middle of a huge recession?
This stinks. This is a bunch of thieves trying to discredit a man who is the only shred of hope in their miserable band of criminals. This is just how disgusting New York State politics is. And it’s just how irresponsible some members of the New York media are. How can anyone read this swill? How can anyone vote for these criminals? That is, of course, unless you are on the receiving end of that gravy train.
Business and jobs to New York State: “Give me three steps towards the door”.
Here are a few highlights of the Governor’s plan:
A billion in new taxes and fees – We need a few billion in tax CUTS not increases. This is just plain stupid.
Over a billion in school aid cuts – yeah – this will squeeze local budgets but it’s got to be done. Bring this battle down to a local level where people have at least some ability to influence the spending directly.
A billion in health care spending cuts – you guessed it. You either come up with $7 billion in cuts or you come up with it in higher taxes. Higher – taxes – fewer jobs. Fewer jobs – lower State revenue. There is no question you could find a billion in waste, abuse and fraud. But it won’t happen because there is no incentive in the government spending system to do so.
Extend benefits of filing as married to gay couples married in states where it’s legal – good as far as it goes. Why don’t we treat all couples in New York at least as well as those who go out of state to get married?
Cut agencies in the executive branch by $1 billion – Hooray! $2 billion anyone? 3?
I have an idea. Let’s cut State spending equally, across the board by $10 billion, give $ 3 billion back to the taxpayers, pro-rata dollar for dollar.
Crazy? Irresponsible? Can’t be done?
How is the status quo working out for you?
Warren Redlich considering LP and GOP bid for NY Governor
January 6, 2010 by Ron MooreRich Cooper’s Ground Report blog has a great post about Warren Redlich and his potential run for Governor on the LP and GOP lines.
Rich writes:
His candidacy was sought by two former State Chairs of theLibertarian Party, Eric Sundwall and me, who believed the Albany area lawyer can harness the energies of the RonPaul and “tea party” movements to advance liberty. Redlich has been active with both movements, serving as the Albany legal representative for the Ron Paul presidential campaign, as a Ron Paul delegate candidate and contributorto the Ron Paul campaign. He participated in some of the Tea Party rallies http://www.wredlich.com/stop-wasting-money/2009/04/yes-they-can.html
Warren has been a candidate for Congress and was elected (GOP) to Town Board in Guilderland, NY in 2007. As a Town Board member Warren proposed a pay cut for himself and other elected officials. He voted for pay freezes in the 2009 and 2010 budgets. In August he stopped an eminent domain effort.
You can check out his facebook group here.
Warren is a speaker at the Manhattan Libertarian Annual Convention January 30th. That will be a great chance to check him out.




