Thursday, June 26, 2008

THE BACK STORY: SECOND AMENDMENT CASE

5 Comments:

At June 27, 2008 7:27 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is so good to know, from long experience reading the Review, that there is at least one man on the left who is not an idiot. Keep it up, Sam. Who knows, the truth may win out yet.I very much appreciate your consistent publication of the truth, without regard to the privileged toes on which you trod. Best, a libertarian.

 
At June 28, 2008 6:24 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sam... You should know better than to use John R. Lott as a reference source. Not only are his analytical abilities questionable..

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2003/10/we_590_01.html

... but a quick Google on the name ' Mary Rosh ' will give some insight into his ethical standards. Lott created a fictitious correspondent to bolster his claims and is an absolute tool of the gun lobbies.

http://www.whoismaryrosh.com/

and

http://www.reason.com/news/show/28771.html

If more gums = less crime, Sadr City should be the safest place on the planet.

 
At June 30, 2008 9:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There's clearly more to it than just gun ownership. Canada, like the US has a high rate of gun ownership, yet has very little crime. The same can't really be said about the US.

 
At July 1, 2008 12:03 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Everybody knows that you start with the outcome you want and then you pick the "facts" you want. That's what propaganda/journalism is all about. The John Lott stuff sounds too good to be true, and it is, but the fantasy is just as useful to the argument, even if it misleads the reader. The idea is to de-legitimize government and democracy itself, by promoting public cynicism in the guise of interaction: "Everything the Clintons do is corrupt." "No it isn't." "Well, all politicians are like that so it doesn't matter if I'm wrong in some details, and it's their fault they've debased humanity."

What I can't understand is how the proprietor is unable to see that his convictions have led him to oppose his principles and abandon his ethics.

 
At July 1, 2008 8:52 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thoughtless and panblind human acquiescence to extremely unjust unlimited-personal-fortunes capitalism (as opposed to pay-justice capitalism) is what drives the vast majority of violence:

Here is Ruth Benedict, pioneering anthropologist, mentor of Margaret Mead, speaking of primitive economic orders, which "fall into two main types":

The first of these I shall call the funnel system. All that the community produces you are to imagine going into the large end of a funnel, which collects everything and channels it toward the richest persons. The collective wealth has only one prime destination, the person who already has valuable possessions. This system depends upon certain men's claims to the labor of others, or upon ownership and the right of favored persons to corner certain articles of wealth. It reaches its highest development where there is interest and where wealth can be used to obtain forced labor.
The second great pattern of economic orders is one I shall call the syphon system. This is the economy where wealth is constantly channeled away from the point of greatest concentration - from any point of concentration - and spread throughout the community. The syphon system ensures great fluidity of wealth.
Since everyone is provided for, poverty is not a word to fear, and anxiety, which develops so luxuriantly in funnel societies, is absent to a degree that seems to us incredible. These are preeminently the societies of good will, where murder and suicide are rare or actually unknown. If such societies have periods of great scarcity, all members of the community cooperate to get through these periods as best they can.
When one is studying aggression in different cultures, therefore, one of the things one looks for is the degree to which economic distribution is set up according to the syphon method or the funnel method.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home