Glibertarians.com 2018 Archive

Category: Society

  • Poll: Religiosity

    In the comments of a post this past Monday by Gadianton, the question came up about religiosity among the Glibertariat.

    For many people this is a complicated, and perhaps sensitive, topic. But when have we ever shied away from THAT here at Glibs?

    However, there are some parameters, please. As you all know, there have been a great many atrocities committed in the name of religion across history, and that continues today. There have also been a great many benevolent acts committed in the name of religion, also continuing today. This is not a poll about which religion is better or worse. This is specifically asking about YOU and your life.

    So here we go! As always, answer all questions, none, or bits and pieces, as you see fit.

    1. Are you an adherent to any particular religion? If so, which?

    2. Were you “born into” a family religious tradition? If so, have you remained in that tradition?

    3. Have your views on faith and religion changed at different stages in your life?

    I’ll start.

    My mother was Roman Catholic, so my sibs and I were all christened. None of us were confirmed. None of us has stayed in that tradition, although at one point I worked for an RC religious order. Mom stayed a member and served on the parish council and was a regular reader for Mass.

    My father was United Methodist, refusing to convert when he married my mother in 1958 (which almost scuttled the whole thing). His second wife is Lutheran, going back and forth between Missouri Synod and ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America), based on who are the other members of the particular church. Dad has been active at various points in whatever Lutheran church to which my stepmom happened to belong, but has never become a member. He is “quietly religious,” but especially likes the “doing good” activities, such as rebuilding homes after Katrina and helping families locally (his non-academic-year profession was electrician), running food banks and cooking for fundraising events, helping kids directly and supporting kid-centric charities and organizations.

    I am an ordained non-denominational minister. I certainly value the legal ability to perform various ministerial ceremonies, but that’s not the main reason I became ordained. People tend to tell me everything, and I mean everything. I have always assumed anything someone tells me is told in confidence, unless it was explicitly stated otherwise. Ordination confers some (varying by state statute) protection against being coerced into spilling that information to representatives of the government. I can legally say, “Fuck off, slavers” in many instances and get away with it.

    Your turn!

  • You Looking at Me?

    It’s a pity that, “Why don’t you take a picture? It’ll last longer” doesn’t translate into anything but gibberish in Japanese. The old fart at the coffee shop is staring at me. Normal people here look away once you bust them ogling you like Steven Gawking, but not these old guys. They’re bored and going to the coffee shop and people watching is their low cost entertainment. My initial reaction is to tell Mr. Miyagi that I don’t want to learn the crane technique and I’m glad his wife died. That is just an evil first thought, so I default to what I usually do in these situations; give the guy the benefit of the doubt.

    So what possible reason could Miyagi have for this atrocious behavior? Maybe his wife really did die and his only connection to humanity is these brief moments with strangers. Maybe his eyes are shot and, while I made eye contact, he simply saw a blob of whiteness sitting across from him. Maybe he’s been fucked by a system that promised him respect after decades of busting his ass at work, but, once he retired, they changed the rules and everyone makes jokes at his expense. Maybe that’s why he doesn’t give a shit about the rules.

    I just fucking hate being stared at. Let me think about that. Why? Maybe it’s because I’m a middle child with five siblings. In our family it was prison rules; if you’re staring, you wanna fight. Damn. That’s more an indictment of my faulty interpretation of the situation than it is a critique of Miyagi’s lack of social grace. Would I have gleefully accepted the gaze of a geezer 40 years later if I hadn’t been raised with psychos?

    To me, the benefit of the doubt doesn’t mean giving the other person a generous interpretation of their behavior. It’s about questioning the little story I’ve concocted to justify why I feel the way I do. FFS, I love the look of pretty young things when I’m the object of a crisp glance. If I was having a cup of coffee and a 7 foot 5 inch guy sat across from me, I’d probably stare, too.

    I can’t say why they do it, but Japanese people tend to give you the benefit of the doubt through their reactions, if not their thoughts. Maybe they do want to kick your ass when you bump into them on the sidewalk, but a “sumimasen” flies from their lips instead. Different culture and it seems to work because they have much fewer problems in the social sphere than we do.

    My brother and I were having a jolly conversation on the train a few years back. We got to his station and he got off so I made some stupid faces at him through the window as the train chugged past him on the platform. This pissed off some tiny old man on the train, and he extended his arm so his palm was an inch from my face and held it there.

    Somewhat crowded train, so I couldn’t squeeze out of the way. I told him in polite Japanese to move his hand. Nope. Second warning. Nope. Finally, I snapped, grabbed his wrist and forced his arm down by his side. “Raise it again and I’m going to fucking kill you.” (No, I’m not teaching you how to say that in Japanese). He stood there quaking because my face was filled with rage.

    Fuck. What am I doing? “I’m sorry. It’s dangerous to have your hand there. The train sometimes stops suddenly.” That wasn’t enough, evidently, because he was still trembling. “We were drinking and may have been talking too loudly. Sorry about that.” At that he apologized to me. By the time we arrived at my station twenty minutes later, I had seen pictures he pulled from his wallet of his wife and kids. In my hand I had his business card with the location of the izakaya he ran. We shook hands as I got off the train.

    When I was walking to the escalator a 20 something kid I tapped me on the forearm. “That was the most amazing thing I’ve ever seen. Good job.” He’d seen the whole the interaction on the train. I wasn’t proud of yanking the old fart’s wrist and maybe I had been acting obnoxiously on the train earlier. I was proud that I gave the old fart the benefit of the doubt and, at least in this case, that caused him to reciprocate with giving me the benefit of the doubt. I never went to his izakaya, though. He was an asshole, but even assholes deserve the benefit of the doubt from time to time.

  • Mormons in the Mist: Had for Good or Evil

    The Prophet Joseph Smith[i]

     

    33 He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.

    Joseph Smith – History 1:33

    The first installment of the Mormons in the Mist articles can be found here. This is part one of a subseries on the history of the Church. This article covers Joseph’s life through the translation of the Book of Mormon.

     
    You cannot discuss The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints without dealing with Joseph Smith, Jr.

    People who know nothing else about the Church know two things: Polygamy and Joe Smith’s Golden Bible. There have been many biographies written about him, from every angle. The best of these of which I am aware is Richard L. Bushman’s 2005 Joseph Smith Rough Stone Rolling. Dr. Bushman acknowledges Joseph’s shortcomings without sliding into a warts-only version and describes his life without becoming hagiographic.

    So, who was Joseph Smith, Jr? To the believing members of the Church, he is the Prophet of the Restoration. A seer and revelator who restored the gospel of Jesus Christ to the earth, founded the Church under the direction of God, and was martyred for his beliefs. His critics say he was a con man and a fake.

    Joseph Smith, Jr. started life as a farm boy. He was born 23 December 1805 in Sharon, Vermont to Joseph Smith Sr. and Lucy Mack Smith. He was the 5th of 11 children (of whom 9 lived to adulthood). When Joseph was 9, the family moved to Palmyra, New York and, four years later, to the nearby town of Manchester.[ii] This positioned the family perfectly for the Second Great Awakening. When he was 14 the wave of religious revivalism swept over the area and the Smith family was caught up in it. Confused by the contention, he followed the advice of James[iii] and prayed for wisdom.

    Joseph reported the results of this prayer:

    I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me.

    17 […] When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

    Joseph Smith – History 1:16-17

    In this vision of the Father and the Son, known as the First Vision, Joseph was instructed not to join any church at that time. A few days later, he mentioned the visitation to a local minister who contemptuously dismissed it as being of the devil and said, “that all such things had ended with the apostles.” Telling the story also “excited a great deal of prejudice against me among the professors of religion[.]”[iv]

    The Golden Plates

    Three years later, he had another visitation[v]. This time the messenger identified himself as Moroni and told the seventeen-year-old prophet about a book of gold plates containing the history of past inhabitants of the Americas. Moroni instructed Joseph through the night, and the next morning Joseph made his way to where the plates were hidden. In a stone box with the plates were a breastplate and two stones connected in the fashion of old fashioned spectacles. The stones were called a Urim and Thummim and were referred to as “interpreters”. He made an unsuccessful attempt to retrieve the contents of the box and was told to return every year for the next four years to receive more instruction.

    Over the course of the next four years, Joseph returned for instruction each year. Among other jobs, he hired on for a month in 1825 to assist a man who was looking for old Spanish silver mines in the area. While engaged in this, he boarded with the family of Isaac Hale, where he met his future wife Emma (Isaac’s daughter). They were married (against the wishes of her family) in January 1827.

    On 22 September 1827, Joseph went to receive his yearly instruction, and Moroni gave him the plates. Behind the relatively bland tale in the canonical version, there is a bit more which Dr. Bushman relates. ‘The angel had commanded Joseph to come to the hill on September 22. To be precise in his compliance and still throw off meddlers who knew of the date, Joseph chose to go to Cumorah in the dead of night, almost the minute September 22 arrived. Around twelve o’clock Joseph came into the room to ask if his mother had a chest with a lock and key. Knowing at once why he wanted it, Lucy was upset when she was unable to provide one. “Never mind,” Joseph assured her. “I can do very well for the present without it – be calm – all is right.” Minutes later Emma passed through the room in her bonnet and riding dress, and Lucy heard the two of them drive off in Joseph Knight’s wagon.’[vi]

    Joseph, Emma, and the plates did not make it home before breakfast. Lucy (Joseph’s mother), covered for them until they returned. Joseph did not bring the plates home at all that day. He hid them in a birch log which he had hollowed out.[vii] In order to make money to pay a cabinet maker to make a box in which to keep the plates safe, Joseph left the next day for Macedon where he was hired to dig a well.

    Along with the plates came a warning that he was “responsible for them; that if I should let them go carelessly, or through any neglect of mine, I should be cut off[.]”[viii] Why such elaborate measures, and such a strict charge? The day after Joseph left for Macedon, his family learned of a plot to find and steal the plates: “[Joseph’s father] learned that ten or twelve men working with Willard Chase were conspiring to find the plates, and had sent for a conjuror sixty miles away whom they believed could discover the hiding place.”[ix] Emma went for Joseph, who left the well and returned quickly to the Smith farm. He then left to retrieve the plates from their hiding place. On the way back from the hiding place, he wrapped the plates in a frock he had been wearing while digging and carried them under his arm. He carried the plates (estimated to weigh between 40 and 50 pounds) that way the three miles back to the farm. Joseph was assaulted three times on the way home but made it back intact except for a dislocated thumb. Over the next several weeks, several groups of people searched for the plates but never found them.[x]

    In order to escape the attacks, Joseph and Emma left Manchester in late fall 1827 and went to Harmony, Pennsylvania to live on her father’s land. There, Joseph settled down to the work of learning how to translate the plates – at the same time providing for his pregnant wife. As part of the process, he copied some characters from the plates and translated them using the Urim and Thummim.

    The Translation of the Book of Mormon

    In February 1828 Martin Harris, a Palmyra farmer who had helped the Smiths escape, paid a visit. He took the copied characters and the translations to Dr. Charles Anthon in New York. Harris related to Joseph what happened:

    64 “I went to the city of New York, and presented the characters which had been translated, with the translation thereof, to Professor Charles Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments. Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated, and he said that they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic; and he said they were true characters. He gave me a certificate, certifying to the people of Palmyra that they were true characters, and that the translation of such of them as had been translated was also correct. I took the certificate and put it into my pocket, and was just leaving the house, when Mr. Anthon called me back, and asked me how the young man found out that there were gold plates in the place where he found them. I answered that an angel of God had revealed it unto him.

    65 “He then said to me, ‘Let me see that certificate.’ I accordingly took it out of my pocket and gave it to him, when he took it and tore it to pieces, saying that there was no such thing now as ministering of angels, and that if I would bring the plates to him he would translate them. I informed him that part of the plates were sealed, and that I was forbidden to bring them. He replied, ‘I cannot read a sealed book.’ I left him and went to Dr. Mitchell, who sanctioned what Professor Anthon had said respecting both the characters and the translation.”[xi]

    Harris returned to his farm in Palmyra, but returned to Harmony in mid-April. He became Joseph’s scribe as the work of translation continued. Joseph would dictate the translation (obtained through the interpreters) to Martin, who sat on the far side of a curtain which kept him from seeing the plates. By mid-June, they had a manuscript of 116 pages hand-written on foolscap. At this point, Martin – hoping to have something tangible to show his wife – asked to be allowed to take the manuscript home and show it to her. [xii]

    Joseph made the request to the Lord and was told no. Martin persisted, and was told no a second time. The third time, the Lord gave permission on the condition that only Martin’s wife, his brother, his parents, and his wife’s sister could see the manuscript.[xiii] Harris left for Palmyra, manuscript in hand.[xiv]

    Two weeks passed with no word from Harris and Joseph began to wonder about the manuscript. Emma encouraged him to go check up on Martin, so Joseph went to his parents’ house in Manchester. When he arrived, a message was sent to Martin, who was expected for breakfast at eight. Martin did not arrive as expected. He finally appeared at twelve-thirty. Joseph’s mother Lucy reports: “[W]e saw him walking with a slow and measured tread towards the house, his eyes fixed thoughtfully upon the ground. On coming to the gate, he stopped instead of passing through and got upon the fence, and sat there some time with his hat drawn over his eyes.”[xv] Martin had not kept his word, and the manuscript was gone.

    The Lord, as you might expect, was not pleased. Martin’s role in the translation of the plates ended. He also withdrew Joseph’s gift of translation until the following Spring. When He restored it, He informed the prophet that the pages were still out there in the hands of people who did not want Joseph to succeed and that to fulfill this goal they had altered the manuscript so that when the section was re-translated, they could publish the altered original and say that Joseph was a fraud.[xvi] To frustrate this, the Lord instructed Joseph not to re-translate the same section, but to begin at another point which covered the same events from another angle.[xvii]

    On 5 April 1829 Oliver Cowdery came to visit the Smiths in Harmony. He had been teaching school in Manchester, and heard about Joseph and the plates while residing at Joseph Sr.’s house. Oliver became Joseph’s scribe, and the translation of the plates resumed.[xviii] In May, as the translation progressed, they came across a passage on baptism. Desiring more information from the Lord, they went to the woods to pray. Joseph relates what occurred:

    “68 […] While we were thus employed, praying and calling upon the Lord, a messenger from heaven descended in a cloud of light, and having laid his hands upon us, he ordained us, saying:

    69 Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness.”[xix]

    This being told them that he was John the Baptist, and instructed them to baptize one another. He also told them that there was another priesthood, called the Melchizedek priesthood which would be conferred upon them later.[xx]

    We do not have a date for the conferral of the Melchizedek priesthood. Since it has the authority to organize the Church, it is reasonable to assume it was restored between the visitation of John the Baptist and the organization of the Church in April of 1830. The first acknowledgement of the event is in a revelation dated August of 1830.[xxi]

    Continuing persecution required them to relocate at the end of May 1829, this time to the farm of Peter Whitmer Sr. in Fayette, New York. Once there, Oliver and Joseph continued the work of translation and completed it about July 1st.[xxii]

    During the entire time the translation was going on, Joseph was not allowed to display the plates to anyone.[xxiii] In a revelation dated March 1829, Martin Harris was told to repent and humble himself and be patient, and he would be one of the people allowed to see the plates.[xxiv] Once the translation was completed, Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, and David Whitmer (the son of the owner of the farm where the translation was completed) received a revelation where, in their own words “And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon[.]”[xxv] An additional eight witnesses (Smith and Whitmer family members) also saw and handled the plates, but did not see an angel.[xxvi]

    Joseph Smith will always be a controversial figure. He founded a church in a log cabin which has grown to over 16 million members. These people believe that he is precisely what he claimed to be – a prophet, seer, and revelator. His critics will tell you that he was a fraud and a charlatan, and that those of us who believe what he said are deluded.

    [i] Photo Credit: www.mormonnewsroom.org

    [ii] Pearl of Great Price Joseph Smith – History 1:3-4

    [iii] James 1:5 KJV

    [iv] Joseph Smith – History 1:21-22

    [v] Joseph Smith – History 1:27-54

    [vi] Bushman, Richard Lyman; Joseph Smith Rough Stone Rolling p 59 internal notes omitted

    [vii] Ibid p 60

    [viii] Joseph Smith – History 1:59

    [ix] Bushman p. 60

    [x] Ibid pp 60 – 62

    [xi] Joseph Smith – History 1:64-65 See also Isaiah 29:11-12

    [xii] Bushman p. 66

    [xiii] ibid

    [xiv] Ibid pp 66 -67

    [xv] Ibid p 67

    [xvi] Doctrine and Covenants 10:10-19

    Personal side note: Those pages are still out there – or were 40 years ago. My father was friends with a man who, at the time this occurred, was a professor of religious studies at BYU. At one point while I was a teenager, this man was in our area giving a talk. After the talk, my father took him out to dinner. In the course of the conversation, the subject of the missing manuscript pages came up, and this man told my father that someone he knew had information on the whereabouts of the manuscript pages. This person had not revealed to my father’s friend where they were or who had them, merely that he had this information.

    [xvii] Doctrine and Covenants 10:30,38-41

    [xviii] Joseph Smith – History 1:66-67

    [xix] Joseph Smith – History 1:68-69

    [xx] Joseph Smith – History 1:70-72

    [xxi] Doctrine and Covenants 27:12

    [xxii] Bushman pp 76-78

    [xxiii] Doctrine and Covenants 5:3

    [xxiv] Doctrine and Covenants 5:23-24

    [xxv] Book of Mormon The Testimony of Three Witnesses

    [xxvi] Book of Mormon The Testimony of Eight Witnesses

  • Traveling Transalpina: the highest road in Romania

    No, not that kind of high… Just 2150 meters above sea level.

    Romania as a country is not exactly well known for its quality infrastructure, although, to be sure, that is relative. It is mostly serviceable, overall, if you don’t like your car too much. Which cannot be said for many a country on our fair planet. We have roads and stuff, although not great on the freeway front. We have yet to have a two lane road crossing the mountains, which generally creates bottlenecks when you try to drive to Transylvania and, further, to Western Europe.

    In fact the bottle neck on the main Road coming to Bucharest from the west is called the Black Hill and it is dark and full of hairpin curves, which sucks when you are stuck behind a truck. It sucks even more at night when the visibility is awful. Accidents are exacerbated by the fact that frustrated drivers often pass recklessly when in a hurry. If you are not in a hurry, a rare case in these times of ours, you can cross the mountain on the scenic route. It may take two hours more, but the roads are almost empty and you can’t beat the view. Sometimes, as the saying goes, one should take the high road.

     

    The high road in this case can be one of two. The older and better known is Transfăgărășan, made famous by Top Gear, back when Top Gear was good. The lesser known one, although it’s well… higher – the highest in Romania – is Transalpina. Both Roads were expensive and unnecessary wastes of resources by the government, one by the communist times the other by the ehm… let’s call them capitalist times. But since they are there now, it can be nice to drive. So I thought I would show the Glibs some pictures of my trip over the Transalpina. And yes, there are many such photos on the internet, many better ones, but these are mine and that’s the point.

    Depending on the route taken, at first the road starts as a standard road between villages, although empty and off the beaten track.

     

    Historically, the road is assumed to be ancient, first started who knows when as a path for taking sheep over the mountains. It was allegedly used by some Roman troops when fighting the Dacians. The Austrians though of making it a road in the 18th century. For most of its history it was just a mountain path, although wider than most such paths. The German army partially paved it with stone and gravel in the First World War, although it was not used much. Romania widened and improved the road in the 1930, when, although not fully paved, it could be crossed using an off-road vehicle.

    Finally the road was fully paved between 2009 and 2015.

    The maximum speed limit is 30, but you would not drive faster anyway given the windy nature. A man could have a lot of fun here on a motorbike. Not me off course, but a man could.

    If you fancy a bite on the road, you can stop at a sheep station (stâna in Romanian) where you can eat polenta, sheep’s cheese, sour cream, and well… mutton. The mutton is a stew and a sort of never ending pot, which sits on a fire and meat is constantly added to cook in what is mostly its own fat and juices and some onion.

    Where there are sheep there are sheep dogs.

     

    Towards the end you go to lower altitudes when the forest starts again.

     

    You can see lakes in the forest if that is your thing.

    Or take a detour through the countryside,

     

    The roads may not always be paved

    And you can encounter some traffic.

    You can visit a church build in 1100 over the ruins of a Roman mausoleum which was built over the ruins of a Dacian temple.

     

     

    After a long day on the road you can stay at a nice hotel and golf course in Transylvania, in a quiet area far from the main road. This was the view from the room

     

     

    Anyway this about covers it. A short trip through Romania. Can’t really think of an ending paragraph right now so I am going to leave it like this.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Poll: Lost Friends & Family

    As most of you know, this past weekend OMWC and I had a lovely dinner with A Leap at the Wheel and Pope Jimbo. During which I asked if they had any suggestions for this week’s poll.

    Pope Jimbo’s response was, perhaps, predictable

    .

     

     

    However, Leap had a great suggestion, and so, I present this week’s poll with a big H/T to Leap!
     
     

    How many friends have you lost due to your politics?

    How many family members have stopped speaking to you due to your politics?

    Do you have any suggestions for future GlibPolls? If yes, email to: poll at thiswebsite dot com

    Discuss!

  • The Problem with Aggregation, Part 2 of an… Aggregation

    TW: No funny pictures, and you may well think I’m somewhere between naive and insulting by the end of this.

    You are what you eat.  Obviously true for actual food for our physical body, but I contend that it is even more true for our mental and spiritual bodies as well.  Probably even more so. If you deny yourself carbs, your body undergoes a process called gluconeogenesis where it turns protein into glucose.  If you deny important inputs to your mind or your spirit, I don’t think there is a similar process to turn garbage in into anything but garbage out.

    In the previous post in this series, I promised that I would put forward a way to use the insight of that post (that aggregation and transitivity isn’t universal,) to make yourself a better person.  Here is the long, round-about way of getting to that suggestion.

    There is a saying that is the answer to the nature / nurture question.  That saying is “Nature loads the gun, the environment pulls the trigger.”  What that means is that ‘nature’ aka your genetics, your inborn instincts, and your physical limitations, they have created you as this machine that reacts to certain things in certain ways.  In one environment, you will act in one way, and in another environment, you will likely act in a very different way to produce a different end result. Take, for example, a big burly man with limited abstract intellect, a distrust of machinery, but with great willpower.  Put him in the workforce in a coal-mining town decades ago, and he will be remembered for generations as an American Hero. Put him in the workforce in a modern metropolis, and he is going to have a hard time holding down a steady job. Same traits, different environment, different outcomes.

    Alla yall nerds, did you read Jim Butcher’s Brief Cases?  Before the story about Marcone, Jim says that in another world, Marcone would be an ideal and humane landlord.  But in wizard-and-magic Chicago, he’s a ruthless crime boss. Same traits, different environment, different outcomes.

    Another example.  Take the world’s most literate, religious, and educated population on the planet.  Put them in a small town with no electronic communication facilities and a low enough level of wealth that many take for granted can only be made as communal property.  A town usually has one oven, and all the ladies get together for bake days. The town has one mill, and all the men get together to for milling days. The town gets one newspaper and everyone gathers together when the mail comes so someone can read it out loud.  Do you know the origin of the title Professor? He was the guy at the university who made up for the fact that there were more students than books. You couldn’t study in the library because there weren’t enough books to go around. They had a job called the reader where a bunch of people sit in a classroom and listen to someone read the books aloud.

    This is a time of very cosmopolitan mixing.  Anabaptists and Lutherans share dinner instead of the sword and the flame.  Brewers sold yeast to Puritans. This happens because of the social environment.  When two ladies are standing around waiting for the oven temperature to drop from “pie” to “bread,” it’s not likely that they’ll debate the scriptural validity of Calvin’s teachings.  They’ll gossip about what sort of social disease the town strumpet gave to the preacher. Men around the millstone, slowly pouring in grain, don’t usually debate the value of the teachings of the Physiocrats vs that of the Scottish philosophers in developing the wealth of a nation.  They talk about how preacher should apply a tincture of lead and witch-hazel to pants and stop riding the town bike.

    Face to face, they’ve got a life to lead with more pressing and immediate concerns than abstract political economy.  Or politics. Or whatever -ism you can think of. And having just seen what a circular firing squad it is when people of different faiths choose to go oppressing others, they opt to find a way to make friendly relations instead.

    This has a drastic impact on what happens when a political disagreement comes up.  I’m of course talking about the Colonies. Former-Loyalist or former-Patriot, early Americans knew that once the war was over they still had to live with each other and they had to work together to overcome the problems of slow communication and honest differences of interest.  First time around, it worked pretty well.

    The second time around…  Well, it didn’t work so well.  The economy and the social fabric of the nation had changed.  Industrialization started in the north. The south became more stratified.  People had less face to face time with each other. Rounded human beings became names, and names became labels.

    Take the same humans out of the colonial environment and put them in Reconstruction.  You have Yankees and Carpetbaggers, not Hank and Cynthia. Instead of a memory of the futility of warring over differences, you have a memory of a war where brother went to war against brother and shit got done because of it (either emancipating the slaves or perpetrating northern aggression and control, depending on which side of the Mason Dixon you haled from.)

    Same traits, different environment, different outcomes.

    The difference in the environment is a social difference.  People knew more people but not as deeply, they cataloged others with labels, and they operated in an environment of labels.

    The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was making you think you can only have tacos on tuesday.  The second greatest trick was to get you to replace people with labels.

    Because the human mind is lazy.  Once you understand something, you won’t go any further to define that thing if we don’t have to.  It has to be beaten into our heads. You have to stand next to someone working a millstone or loading bread into an oven day-in and day-out to see them as a human being instead of a label.

    In short, labels are a way to aggregate people into types.  It happened less in the Colonies, more in Reconstructions and…

    And now, its out of control.  Our social environment is becoming mediated by platforms and trends that reduces the standing-around-next-to-people time and increase the labeling tools at your disposal.  Social media is making us evil, because remember, aggregation of humans is the root of evil these days. Your ability to spend more and more time plugged into your phone means you are spending less and less time being bored next to people you don’t have much in common with.  Fewer and fewer kids are spending time running around the neighborhood with whoever happens to liveby, and more and more time being shuttled around to activities full of like-minded families.

    And it’s making us worse off.  On this website, lots of you call it derp.  Posting links to show just how out of touch some idiot progressive or statist is.  Progressive. Statist. These are labels and they do their damage even when, especially when, they are right.  

    Using labels like this makes someone a foot soldier in the culture war.  “SJW” is used as a knowing insult. It’s a poke at people who are warriors when there’s no war to be waged.  Its an assertion that these people are Mad Online in the real world. They can’t meme because they take everything to serious.

    And in a lot of cases, it’s a rhetorical blow that strikes true.  But it’s a blow in the culture war. It’s a fight in the war fueled with labels.  It’s a blow in a battle that doesn’t need to be fought. Not by the SJWs. And not by us.

    There’s names for people who fight battles even when it’s not appropriate.  Different names in different times and places, but it’s an old idea. In one time, in one place, they were called ber-serkir.  They were so useful in their society that they were treated like divine gifts. But that’s not what we call them now in modern culture.  Now, if you go and you fight a battle without provocation, it just makes you a maniac.

  • Not Just Self-Evident

    Suthenboy is not a credentialed philosopher. Consult a credentialed professional before deciding.
    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” -Declaration of Independence of the United States, 1776

    The notion of natural rights, that a person’s rights are inseparable from that person under any circumstances, is a relatively new concept and one that is and has been from the outset of its declaration controversial. It’s detractors say that it is an abstract concept existing only in the minds of its proponents. They claim that there is no objective evidence that such a thing exists in nature and thus that morality and ethics are arbitrary. I disagree.

    Whatever our founders believed the source of natural rights they made and appeal to the divine to justify belief in them. Perhaps it was a somewhat cynical, utilitarian approach to appeal to a nation that was strongly religious.

    “Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God?” -Thomas Jefferson

    Certainly the founders were not monolithic in their belief in the origin of rights, but they were in agreement that they existed. I propose that whether a gift from God or simply existing by virtue of our nature objective evidence can be found for their existence. It does not matter where they come from, their existence is evident.

    Few rational people would argue that our world does not function on naturally existing laws. The sciences operate on this premise. Science is a method for discovering what those laws are and how they affect ourselves and the world around us. The veracity of scientific discoveries is measured by the ability of those discoveries to make accurate predictions about how we and the world around us will behave. By this measure science is a far superior system than, say, astrology. Simply put, superior systems yield superior results.

    An engineer that can produce a functioning spacecraft certainly has a superior grasp of the laws of physics and chemistry than one whose most sophisticated accomplishment is a dugout canoe. The production of a computer requires a far greater depth of knowledge about nature’s law than the production of an abacus.

    Geologists have a deeper understanding of the earth’s structure than the guy who believes in turtles all the way down and so can produce petroleum or predict earthquakes and volcanoes whereas the latter cannot. The success of this system of knowledge is evidence of its correlation with natural law.

    Those disciplines are based on an understanding of the naturally existing laws of physics and chemistry. Systems of morality and ethics are the products of ideas. Their success depends on how closely those ideas conform to the natural laws of human nature and economics.

    To whatever degree societies have allowed individual liberty – that is the belief in and respect for natural rights – success by any measure has been exponentially greater than those societies that have not. The United States is the premier example of such a society.

    The US has produced more wealth than all other nations through the history of mankind combined. The US contributed to increased worldwide health, wealth and longevity more than any other nation. The US has more social mobility than any other nation. The US produced air conditioning, flight, electricity, refrigeration, hamburgers, hotdogs, telephones, mass produced automobiles, atomic energy, chocolate for the masses, heart surgery, vulcanized rubber, computers and the internet. The list is nearly endless. As the joke goes “There are two kinds of nations: nations that do X, and nations that have put men on the moon.” Nearly everything that makes the modern world what it is is a product of the United States.

    This wild success is the product of a belief in and respect for natural rights. Innovative individuals have been free to innovate and profit from their efforts. Individuals have been able to think, speak and act as they willed more than in any other society. By respecting the concept of self-ownership – that every individual naturally owns their mind, body and conscience exclusively and thus the product of their intellectual and physical labor – a powerful incentive for those individuals to strive for success is created. As a result the United States has flourished more than any nation in history and contributed mightily to the welfare of all mankind.

    Simply put, superior systems produce superior results because they adhere more closely to the existing laws of nature. A belief in and respect for natural rights has unquestionably produced superior results.
    * Fun story: During World War II my grandfather owned a pulpwood business and had a contract with the federal government to use German POW labor. One of the jobs he secured was in south Louisiana. He transported the POWs to the job site on a route that went through Baton Rouge. The first time the POWs saw the Wilkinson bridge they were awestruck. If you have occasion to cross that bridge pay attention to it. Most people that cross the bridge take it for granted but if you really look at the scale of it it is awe inspiring. It is easy to see how the POWs were barely able to believe their own eyes. What they said to my grandfather about it really stuck with me. “If we had known what America is like we never would have gone to war against you. No one can defeat a country that can build something like this.”

  • Unseen Effects of the War on Drugs

    I have argued for a long time that the War on Drugs is the most destructive domestic policy since slavery. When you look at the inordinate rates of incarceration, it is best viewed as a direct continuation of Jim Crow laws and their impact on minority subjugation.

    While we all see the damage of the Drug War and the consequences inflicted on all involved, there are invisible and pernicious side effects that mostly go unnoticed. During my time in my hostel in Vietnam, I experienced something firsthand that often goes under the radar. The foreseeable consequences shoved down your throat.

    The guy at the front desk at my place offered me some weed. After a long day in the heat showing my mother around Hanoi, I was more than happy to purchase. I get into my room, had several drinks and smoked a large joint in the bathroom.

    I proceeded to chill, read and listen to music. And then the disturbance began.

    My private room is at the end of the hall. I hear a man and a woman, both in their early 20s by the sound of it, start to argue. It sounded like the man had gotten her down from the rooftop bar to begin his tirade.

    He is yelling at her. Something about her needing to “open [her] eyes” about something. It seemed very obvious that he was railing into her about how she could be so blind to not see how her boyfriend/significant other was cheating on her. I could be wrong about that, but that’s the gist that I got.

    I heard violent sounds. He wasn’t hitting her, but was banging doors and hollow metal, probably an air-conditioner unit. He was violently punching his own hand as punctuation. I could hear when she spoke but not what she said.

    I could only hear her sniffling and weeping.

    I was very concerned. I got on the floor and listened through the crack below the door. I got a cup to put to my ear to hear, though of no real advancement in my acoustic surveillance. The beratement continued.

    Amidst many slammed doors and stops-and-starts, a lull blanketed the hallway. I paused in introspection. My brain wants me to intervene. I’ve gotten one beating in my life and that was in Germany preventing a girl from being raped. Three men took turns kicking me in the face until I was unconscious. I was broken, but I’m very proud of that moment. I didn’t know if I’d have to do such a thing again.

    It began again. But this time it was another voice doing the shouting. I gathered that it was the boyfriend who had been called out. More door slamming. More punching of metal. More violent fists in palms.

    I decided to do something. I have two titanium hips and there’s a big concrete staircase. I can’t get directly involved, I figured. But maybe my appearance and a wary eye would keep people on their better behavior. I get dressed and put my shoes on.

    As I went to open the door, a sickening wave fell over me. I smelled my room. I evaluated myself. I am half-drunk, very stoned, and my room reeks like Paul McCartney’s in 1966. I took my hand off the knob.

    I thought about calling the lobby for help. But even then I realized that I would be a person-of-interest, and I certainly didn’t want to get in drug trouble in Commie Vietnam while on vacation with my mother.

    I was disgusted with myself. I kept listening and monitoring the situation. But I didn’t dare step outside my enclave and approach a confrontation where it sounded like imminent violence was about to ensue.

    I was too terrified to try to help this poor girl who was surrounded by at least two–drunk–large men who were doing everything that they could to intimidate her. Or possibly worse.

    This is just one of the evil, unseen effects of the Drug War. See Something; Say Something, they preach. But how many crimes go unreported because the witness is afraid to talk to the authorities or to testify because of some bullshit drug charge is hanging over them? I wasn’t being threatened by some thug or a criminal syndicate. I felt threatened by what the government could do to me and how they could ruin my life. All because of a plant.

    There isn’t much of a difference between the government and the Mafia. Punishment is punishment, regardless of who your jury is.

    I am sickened by how I responded to these external forces. But I do know why I acted the way that I did. It doesn’t make me feel better. Rather the opposite.

    People are handicapped by these immoral laws. They don’t report things that they know are wrong because they are trained to be fearful of the imminent reprisal. Is my getting beaten and sent to jail for smoking weed worth a girl getting thrashed around a bit?

    It’s a deeply disturbing calculus that goes through your head when you attempt to rationalize your decision to do nothing.

    A law on the books actively prevented me from helping a person in a very violent confrontation. That is the effect of these laws. I can only gather that this is how they want me to feel.

    Helpless. Alone. Dependent.

    And any attempt to do any good is struck down with the violent gavel of the God of Government.

    That’s the problem. Good people afraid to do good things. Because the punishment that might follow isn’t worth the gamble.

  • Mormons in the Mist: What do they Believe

     

    Mormons (members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints), are everywhere, and there seems to be a bunch of nonsense over what we believe. So, I thought I’d start with our basic faith statement: The Articles of Faith. The Articles of Faith lay out thirteen points which members of the Church believe. They are part of a larger document known as the Wentworth Letter. The Wentworth letter was written by Joseph Smith, Jr. at the request of John Wentworth, editor of the Chicago Democrat, in 1842. Wentworth was looking for a sketch of the history of the church, along with some insight into what we believed.  Here, then are the Articles of Faith.

    We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

    The Godhead is comprised of 3 individual beings: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The Father and the Son have physical bodies, while the Holy Ghost is a person of spirit[i]. Each member of the Godhead has a specific mission. The Father is God, our creator. We worship him. The Son is Jesus the Christ. He is our Savior. We return to the presence of God only by virtue of his Atonement.[ii] The Holy Ghost is a messenger and witness. He is the bearer of inspiration and testifies of truth.[iii] The relationship between them is indicated when we pray:

    I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.[iv]

    As you can see from the verse above, we pray to the Father in the name of Christ (the Son) and receive our answer through the Holy Ghost.

    We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

    Sin is not heritable. The first time I heard about the doctrine of Original Sin, I was confused. How could you hold someone else responsible for the acts of another person? The answer, of course, is that you can’t. And God doesn’t. What is inherited (depending on the action) are the consequences of those actions. The consequence of the Fall is that men are mortal and separated from God.

    We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel.

    The Atonement of Christ – when He took upon Himself our sins and afflictions – opens the way to overcome the consequences of the Fall. If we live in accordance with the gospel, we will be able to return to the presence of God. He has specified the conditions under which this is possible. The laws of the gospel are principles which help us return to God. The ordinances of the gospel are specific ceremonies (such as baptism) which are required to return to God.

    We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    Faith is an active belief in “things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”[v] In the Book of Mormon, the prophet Alma adds the qualification “which are true.”[vi] Faith in Christ leads us to a recognition of our fallen state, and our need for repentance. Repentance is the process whereby we take advantage of the Atonement and receive forgiveness for our sins.

    Baptism is a ceremony whereby your sins are symbolically washed away, and you are reborn.[vii] In the LDS faith, baptism is done by immersion (complete submergence in the water). The Gift of the Holy Ghost is the privilege of always having the Holy Ghost with you, on condition of worthiness.

    We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer the ordinances thereof.

    “And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.”[viii] No member of the Church simply hangs out a shingle and declares himself a bishop (head of a local congregation), or a Sunday School teacher, or any other position in the church. Positions in the Church are filled by being called by the person with the authority to issue the calling. The Church has a hierarchy of who issues which callings.

    We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

    The Church organization is patterned after the Church in the time of the apostles. “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;”[ix] We believe that this is the organization which Christ wants, and that he established in antiquity, and again when he restored the Church.

    We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

    The LDS Church is built on the concept of revelation. The beginning of the church can be traced to a revelation given to Joseph Smith, Jr. in 1820.[x] Examples of the other spiritual gifts feature prominently throughout church history.

    We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

    Errors in translation and transcription have crept into the Bible. As a result, many parts are confusing, and even contradictory. The Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and the translation is assumed to be as God wants it. This does not mean that we hold the Book of Mormon to be inerrant, merely that any mistakes are not errors in translation. The title page of the book states in part “And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men[.]”[xi]

    We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

    The canon is not closed. As noted above, the church is based on revelation, and that revelation continues to this day. We believe that everyone in the Church can receive revelation for their own lives, and the lives of those for whom they are responsible (The Prophet for the Church, parents for their families, bishops for their congregations, teachers for their classes, etc.). People learning of the Church are urged to ask for a personal revelation regarding the truth of what they are being taught.

    We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.

    This one speaks for itself. We believe that these events will occur as we get closer to the millennial return of Christ.

    We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

    The choice to worship (or not) and how to do it is personal. Worship (or don’t) as you see fit and extend the same courtesy to others.

    We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

    Members of the Church are expected to be good citizens of their countries. Where there are inequities in the laws, they are expected to work within the system to address them. 

    We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul – We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

    We strive to be righteous, faithful, and patient people, and to learn as much as we can. We believe that “the glory of God is intelligence,”[xii] and that truth is not restricted to what we already know.

    Feel free to ask questions in the comments. I’ll be happy to respond – either immediately, or in another article

     

    [i] Doctrine & Covenants 130:22

    [ii] Acts 4:12

    [iii] Book of Mormon Moroni 10:5

    [iv] Book of Mormon Moroni 10:4

    [v] Hebrews 11:1

    [vi] Book of Mormon Alma 32:21

    [vii] John 3:3-5

    [viii] Hebrews 5:4

    [ix] Ephesians 4:11

    [x] Pearl of Great Price Joseph Smith – History

    [xi] Book of Mormon – Title Page

    [xii] Doctrine & Covenants 93:36

  • YouTubers of Interest

    YouTube, despite its corporate leadership being very regressive, has become a hub for alternative viewpoints regarding current political and cultural events. I thought I’d do a writeup about YouTubers who create content I believe would be of interest to Glibs. The video creators are mainly concerned with current events from a political and/or philosophical perspective, however a few make videos about popular culture or general interest topics as well.

    This article is not meant to be either authoritative or comprehensive (and there will be follow ups regarding these or other YouTubers), but rather a jumping off point for commentators to add both their own perspectives on those I’ve listed, disagreements with my opinions, as well as discussing YouTubers I’ve omitted either through ignorance or difference in perspective.

    So here, in no particular order, are some of my YouTubers of interest:

    Liberty Doll – A Libertarian woman with a Judy Greer-esque 40’s-50s’ nerd chic vibe, she often discusses 2A issues, including the recent 3D printing kerfluffle. She also discusses current events, liberty issues, as well as feminism and other anti-liberty philosophies.

    Styxhexenhammer666 – A former Satanist and current mystic/spiritualist, Styx creates a lot of content about current political events, both foreign and domestic (including Trump). He occasionally has a slightly unusual take on matters which doesn’t always jibe with the standard libertarian view.  He’s done a couple series of non-political videos. They are mostly related to the occult, but he also has a series of garden videos.

    Matt Christiansen – His perspective is (in my view) somewhere between classical liberal and libertarian. Unlike many video producers, he doesn’t see the need to inject a hyper personality, instead stating the facts (and unleashing his acerbic wit) in his calm midwestern inflection. The videos might be on Trump or, say, pointing out the current stupidity in Portland. He also does the Beauty and the Beta podcast/livestream with Blonde in the Belly of the Beast. Blonde is an attractive woman who, over the past few years, moved from libertarianism to a much more conservative / identitarian perspective. (Think an American Lauren Southern without the public provocation).

     Sargon of Akkad / The Thinkery – One of the bigger names in the anti-SJW ‘skeptic’ YouTube community, Sargon generally holds classical liberal views. He’s able to court controversy even beyond the standard regressive community (a few Glibs have been quite critical). As a UK resident, his perspective is mainly focused on Britain. In addition to his videos on the Islamization of the UK and Europe, he also has videos about recent events.

    Karen Straughn / Honey Badger Radio – Karen and the others at Honey Badger Radio focus on men’s rights issues and critiques of feminism. The mostly female group makes interesting videos pointing out the discrepancies in feminist narratives and the legal and existential realities related to gender issues, ‘male disposability’, and why men’s issues are generally not taken seriously in the larger society (including why women should care about men’s issues).

    Freedom Toons – Freedom Toons creates satirical cartoon videos from a libertarian perspective. Some of his targets have included modern journalism and free speech. These videos are short, so they’re good if you only have 5 minutes or so.

    Bearing / Patrick – An Australian shit poster, Bearing generally goes after leftists and SJWs with humor. A couple of his recent videos have included one on the fight between Australian senators David Leyenhjelm and Sarah H Young and another on Lauren Southern’s Australia visit. His girlfriend is YouTuber Sugartits, who makes similar content.

    Hard Bastard – He largely does videos regarding current events – such as the Cohen tapes – from a right of center perspective. A former Jehovah’s Witness, he often brings a slightly different view to his videos. His girlfriend is Aydin Paladin, who is (amazingly) a sociological graduate student with a general liberty focus. She mainly does videos on recent events, but also likes to delve into academic topics, both largely using that sociological framework. She has also worked with the Honey Badgers on a few of their videos. (Note: while I find her videos interesting, they are 1) academic, and 2) not short)

    The Pholosopher – A Chinese American Ancap woman, she’s about as libertarian as you can get. A huge 2A proponent, she enjoys appearing in her anti-gun control videos with her AR. She also makes videos about how the US government has messed up the Middle East, and that taxation is theft.

    Timcast – This will probably be one of my more controversial picks. Tim Pool is a former Vice reporter who is now trying to make a living as an independent reporter. As you’d suspect from someone who used to work with Vice, his politics are left of center. I include him because he does a couple things incredibly rare for journalists these days. He tries to get his facts correct, and he separates those facts from his evaluation of them. While he deeply dislikes Trump, he actually evaluates Trump’s actions on an individual basis rather than issue a blanket condemnation. I respect this.

    Ben Shapiro – While Shapiro is mostly conservative rather than libertarian, he’s a skilled debater and often interesting. Also, since I’ve pointed out the women here a few times, let me link to his interview with Mike Rowe for Kristen.