Thursday, March 18, 2010

Elected Criminals and Convicted Criminals

I don’t think much of politicians.  In fact, I think many are in politics simply because they can get away with criminal actions under the guise of legal maneuverings in whatever office they serve.  If politicians were not operating under the safety of the umbrella of their elected annointment, they would simply be petty criminals, embezzelers, check kiters, or some other two bit thief, and thus they would fit right in with actual convicted criminals.

Which is why the following headline makes me laugh, in a very jaundiced way.

State officials ‘embarrassed’ after learning $9M in tax credits went to Richard A. Short, convicted embezzler

I’ll bet State of Michigan officials are embarrassed, but what about Jennifer Granholm?  She was on stage with this Richard A. Short, twenty-four (24) hours earlier, bragging up this guy, the tax credits Short had wrangled from the state, and all the jobs he was going to create with some company he’s allegedly creating called Renewable and Sustainable Companies (RASCO), and now Short is under arrest, again, for parole violations, and stills owes $96K from prior fraud activities.

What a great team.

Additional coverage here.

Posted by John Venlet on 03/18 at 04:05 PM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Individualism and Communitarianism

Tom Palmer’s 1996 essay, Myths of Individualism, which was written for the Cato Institute, has been published in the Bulgarian language.  Congratulations, Tom.

The essay delves into aspects referenced in the title to this post, and explores what I think is the confoundedness of group identity, and clearly discusses why individualism is not misanthropic.  A couple of exceprts.

Libertarianism is not at base a metaphysical theory about the primacy of the individual over the abstract, much less an absurd theory about “abstract individuals.” Nor is it an anomic rejection of traditions, as Kirk and some conservatives have charged. Rather, it is a political theory that emerged in response to the growth of unlimited state power; libertarianism draws its strength from a powerful fusion of a normative theory about the moral and political sources and limits of obligations and a positive theory explaining the sources of order. Each person has the right to be free, and free persons can produce order spontaneously, without a commanding power over them.

And this.

To repeat, communitarians maintain that we are constituted as persons by our particular obligations, and therefore those obligations cannot be a matter of choice. Yet that is a mere assertion and cannot substitute for an argument that one is obligated to others; it is no justification for coercion. One might well ask, If an individual is born with the obligation to obey, who is born with the right to command? If one wants a coherent theory of obligations, there must be someone, whether an individual or a group, with the right to the fulfillment of the obligation. If I am constituted as a person by my obligation to obey, who is constituted as a person by the right to obedience? Such a theory of obligation may have been coherent in an age of God-kings, but it seems rather out of place in the modern world. To sum up, no reasonable person believes in the existence of abstract individuals, and the true dispute between libertarians and communitarians is not about individualism as such but about the source of particular obligations, whether imposed or freely assumed.

There is much more which I could quote, though the essay is not prohibitive in length.

Posted by John Venlet on 03/18 at 09:00 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Heads in the Sand?

Mike Vanderboegh at Sipsey Street Irregulars.

Here we are on the verge of a civil war and because the news media does not even recognize the validity of our grievances,and certainly never reports them, nobody thinks it is coming except the people preparing for it.

Victor Davis Hanson in a piece titled Reflections on the Revolution in America.

These are exciting though scary revolutionary times, akin to the constant acrimony in the fourth-century BC polis, mid-nineteenth century revolutionary Europe, or — perhaps in a geriatric replay — the 1960s. This is an era when the fundamental assumptions of the individual and the state are now being redefined, albeit in a weird, high-tech, globalized landscape.

Vanderboegh’s observation is closely tied to Hanson’s ruminations.

UPDATE:  Moody’s fears social unrest as AAA states implement austerity plans

The US rating agency said the US, the UK, Germany, France, and Spain are walking a tightrope as they try to bring public finances under control without nipping recovery in the bud. It warned of “substantial execution risk” in withdrawal of stimulus.

“Growth alone will not resolve an increasingly complicated debt equation. Preserving debt affordability at levels consistent with AAA ratings will invariably require fiscal adjustments of a magnitude that, in some cases, will test social cohesion,” (bold by ed.)  said Pierre Cailleteau, the chief author.

Posted by John Venlet on 03/18 at 07:49 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages