Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Mo Dowd demands that people like her stop telling the story she loves to tell about single women Previous entry: Alabama: Geometry teacher uses assassinating Obama as example to teach angles to students

They’re really this hardcore

EducationHistoryTexas

The super hard core right wing takeover of the Texas State School Board has been completed. Under the guise of eradicating liberal bias, the school board created a set of standards that require schools to teach factually incorrect right wing propaganda in lieu of history. And it’s bad:

Several changes include sidelining Thomas Jefferson, who favoured separation of church and state, while introducing a new focus on the “significant contributions” of pro-slavery Confederate leaders during the civil war.

The new curriculum asserts that “the right to keep and bear arms” is an important element of a democratic society. Study of Sir Isaac Newton is dropped in favour of examining scientific advances through military technology.

There is also a suggestion that the anti-communist witch-hunt by Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s may have been justified.

Some of that is to be expected—-their anti-modernist, pro-paranoid worldview isn’t a surprise anymore.  But even I was surprised to see that someone appears to have a vendetta against the theory of gravity, and that the school board has decided to indulge it.  Pro-science liberals are often joking that the attacks on the theory of evolution are the equivalent of attacking the theory of gravity, but that’s because we foolishly thought they’d never go that far.  But I guess we’re wrong—-if it’s going to piss a liberal off, I suppose at least some wingnuts are going to deny the theory of gravity.  Perhaps believing in gravity is the top of a slippery slope towards believing in evolution?  Or maybe they just want to discourage kids from believing that science itself exists outside of the realm of weapons development?  Who fucking knows?

But it gets worse!  They’ve set new records in denialism of American slavery.

The education board has dropped references to the slave trade in favour of calling it the more innocuous “Atlantic triangular trade”, and recasts the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as driven by Islamic fundamentalism.

I will say that this gets to the heart of the mode of thought that’s best described as “slavery denialism”—-anything from denying that the Civil War was fought because of slavery to minimizing the horror of slavery.  I think the initial assumption about slavery denialists is that they’re in denial because they don’t want to admit that America has such an ugly history, and so they minimize it.  But what I’ve learned about denialists is that it’s usually something a bit different—-they want to sow confusion about an issue mostly because they either aren’t down on horrible thing X or they actually kind of dig the idea of of horrible thing X or they share attitudes with the perpetrators of horrible thing X.  Minimizing is part of this, because it’s about implying that people with attitudes like theirs aren’t so bad, but part of it is always perpetrating the attitudes that caused horrible thing X.

You definitely see that going on with this euphemism for the slave trade.  “Atlantic triangular trade” reduces the human beings that were forced into slavery to commodities like tobacco or sugar.  To use this euphemism is to implicitly agree with slave owners that enslaved people don’t count as human beings.  What seems on the surface to be minimizing is, if you look a little deeper, actually agreeing with the ideology underpinning slavery and making excuses for it.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 06:15 PM • (166) Comments

*sigh*

You know how you know your when society is completely doomed?  When batshit wingnuttery like this is completely passe.

Comment #1: schism  on  05/18  at  06:48 PM

If you teach it right—and it comes up when I assign Robert Hayden’s “Middle Passage” in my poetry classes—you can make Triangular Trade even more potent than the word slavery, as long as you focus on the idea that slave traders thought of slaves as commodities and you accentuate the inhumanity of that thought process. Working with Hayden makes that a lot easier. But obviously, that’s not what the Texas School Board people are going for. The funny/sad thing is that this move isn’t a new one. If I remember correctly, that’s about how my high school history book talked about it 25 years ago. I grew up in Louisiana, so it’s not surprising that I got that alongside the whole “War of Northern Aggression” rhetoric.

Comment #2: Incertus, Nacho Daddy  on  05/18  at  06:53 PM

You definitely see that going on with this euphemism for the slave trade.  “Atlantic triangular trade” reduces the human beings that were forced into slavery to commodities like tobacco or sugar.  To use this euphemism is to implicitly agree with slave owners that enslaved people don’t count as human beings

Correct. There’s a difference between putting the slave trade in a larger economic context (which is what they’ll no doubt claim with doe-eyed disingenuousness), and equating human trafficking with the innocuous selling of molasses or booze (which is the real intent).

Here’s something tangential I’m curious about: there’s more and more buzz about replacing dead-tree textbooks with tablet computers, and a concurrent discussion of incorporating more open-source/public domain texts and curricula on such platforms. How likely is it that this might start breaking the noxious Texas school board’s long-standing influence on texts and curricula nationwide.

Comment #3: Gracchus.  on  05/18  at  06:54 PM

I concur schism, but I prefer the Sisko facepalm. http://i46.tinypic.com/2d11v0j.jpg

Comment #4: BenYitzhak  on  05/18  at  06:57 PM

The use of “Atlantic triangular trade” is also a half step towards eliminating dicussion of the slave trade entirely. Since the ships didn’t literally take a trangular route (i.e. the same ship didn’t travel all three legs of the traiangle, rather it was a more complex path of multiple routes, ships, and trade companies) then “obviously” the whole concept of the slave trade overblown as part of a PC conspiracey..etc.etc.etc.  (Per the argument in place over at Conservapedia)

Comment #5: SpotWeld  on  05/18  at  07:03 PM

You’re being too kind—these people aren’t slavery denialists, they’re slavery apologists.

Comment #6: serena kitt  on  05/18  at  07:06 PM

There are Relativity denialists, too.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Relativity

Comment #7: oldfeminist  on  05/18  at  07:07 PM

I don’t know.. “Atlantic triangular trade” is a pretty great phrase, regardless of what it is trying to refer to.

Comment #8: Tree  on  05/18  at  07:19 PM

#7

From the Conservapedia article:

“Despite censorship of dissent about relativity, evidence contrary to the theory is discussed outside of liberal universities.”

That HAS to be satire.

(Doesn’t it?)

Comment #9: atheist  on  05/18  at  07:20 PM

OK, I admit it. I’m scared.

Comment #10: atheist  on  05/18  at  07:22 PM

You have got to be kidding me.
My jaw dropped reading this- and I wonder how people can justify it?
Like you said, it’s blatant. No one is trying to hide what they are doing, and seemingly, not too many people care.
I grew up the child of two very conservative (anti-evolution, islam is evil, semi-racist) parents, and I credit my education as being the saving grace for me. Even though they tried to stifle it, plenty got through (I got pulled out of 7th grade when they started reading Siddhartha).
I feel for these kids who won’t have the chance to learn anything other than what they are learning at home, no opposing voices, no Newton for christs sake!

Comment #11: yazikus  on  05/18  at  07:23 PM

I bet they’d bring Newton back if they knew he was a champion of abstinence, Biblical prophecy, and hanging coin-clippers.

Comment #12: Lindsay Beyerstein  on  05/18  at  07:26 PM

hanging coin-clippers?

Comment #13: yazikus  on  05/18  at  07:27 PM

I saw on “Need to Know” a couple of other substitutions. “Capitalism” is now “free market,” and “imperialism” is “expansionism.”

Comment #14: Emily  on  05/18  at  07:32 PM

Also from the conservapedia article:

Some liberal politicians have extrapolated the theory of relativity to metaphorically justify their own political agendas. For example, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama helped publish an article by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe to apply the relativistic concept of “curvature of space” to promote a broad legal right to abortion.

That’s right. Obama is so powerful, he can warp space and time, just to get an abortion.

Comment #15: Keith  on  05/18  at  07:32 PM

You are lucky to have escaped while you still had your sanity and your freedom, just as I was to escape Oklahoma 20 some years ago.  The lunatics really are in charge of the asylum and they are not going to let go without a very bloody fight.

Comment #16: DrDick  on  05/18  at  07:34 PM

Coin-clippers were people who would cut off the very edges of a coin. It’s why Quarter, Dimes, and Half-dollars have fluting on the edges.

Basically, they would shave off the very outmost part of the coin, leaving enough so that hopefully people wouldn’t notice there was coin missing, but getting enough silver or gold to be worth their time.

Comment #17: BenYitzhak  on  05/18  at  07:35 PM

@atheist: Nothing on Conservapedia is satire.  Even the stuff added by trolls doesn’t count because Andy Schlafly runs the site like Kim Jong-Il.  If it’s there, he considers it real.

Comment #18: schism  on  05/18  at  07:36 PM

huh- fascinating.
I always wondered a little bit why they had that fluting.
Thanks for the info.
I imagine that would have had to have been a full time “hobby” to break even!

Comment #19: yazikus  on  05/18  at  07:37 PM

If it’s there, he considers it real.

GOD DAMN THAT SHIT IS FUCKING MADNESS

Comment #20: atheist  on  05/18  at  07:39 PM

The fluting on modern American coins is a tradition or relic at this point.  When coins were made of actual precious metal, it was a different story.

Comment #21: libdevil  on  05/18  at  07:48 PM

A client told me the other day that the price of nickel had risen and for the first time in ages the Nickel coin was actually worth 6 cents due to it’s nickel content. I’m going to be rich- woohoo!

Comment #22: yazikus  on  05/18  at  07:50 PM

I bet they’d bring Newton back if they knew he was a champion of abstinence, Biblical prophecy, and hanging coin-clippers.

But he was totally into alchemy, and that’s the work of Satan.  Or something.

Comment #23: Linnaeus  on  05/18  at  07:55 PM

“I saw on “Need to Know” a couple of other substitutions. “Capitalism” is now “free market,” and “imperialism” is “expansionism.””

Why don’t we call everything “Freedom” and get it over with?  Or maybe “Victory”, since it’s obvious that 1984 isn’t a cautionary tale but a roadmap…

Freedom is Peace
Freedom is War

Freedom is Slavery
Slavery is Freedom

Freedom is Strength
Freedom is Ignorance

Freedom is Everything
Everything is Freedom

Comment #24: MikeEss  on  05/18  at  08:03 PM

Here’s something tangential I’m curious about: there’s more and more buzz about replacing dead-tree textbooks with tablet computers, and a concurrent discussion of incorporating more open-source/public domain texts and curricula on such platforms. How likely is it that this might start breaking the noxious Texas school board’s long-standing influence on texts and curricula nationwide.

While there is the positives of open-source/public domain texts on tablet computers and many of their proponents…the politicians, publishing corporations, textbook authors who side with those corporations, school board officials, educrats, etc will fight tooth and nail to minimize and eliminate those positives and accentuate the negatives…..namely greater restrictions through hardware/software lockdowns not only for censorship/book banning purposes…but also to help those publishing corporations by moving to a rent per use economic model rather than own and use according to discretion of buyer or those s(he) lends book to.  To prevent the inevitable attempts to circumvent those lockdowns….add school sanctioned spyware whether it passes legal muster or not and extend zero tolerance policies with maxed out penalties to make examples of those “malcontent criminals” who dare defy TPTB. 

A reason why I am not too enthused about electronic books/tablets…...especially when one ebook company has already demonstrated one of the above mentioned negatives by deleting books which didn’t pass some sort of IP muster without any notification…much less consent of the electronic book owners.

Comment #25: exholt  on  05/18  at  08:05 PM

Actually, if there’s no such thing as gravity, being at the top of a slippery slope is no problem.

Comment #26: Ape Man  on  05/18  at  08:10 PM

Is there anything we can do? I know that TexAss has the clout in this matter, but can’t we write to the publishers? What has happened to my country?! *weeps* (I’m guessing there is no mention of the great Marine General Smedley Butler? :/

Comment #27: pitbullgirl65  on  05/18  at  08:12 PM

Orwellian.

Comment #28: happyfungirl  on  05/18  at  08:25 PM

Re: hanging coin-clippers. Newton was the Master of the Royal Mint for many years. At the time, coins were made out of precious metals and scam artists would debase the currency by clipping coins for the metal. Newton enjoyed catching these scofflaws and attending their hangings.

Comment #29: Lindsay Beyerstein  on  05/18  at  08:26 PM

A client told me the other day that the price of nickel had risen and for the first time in ages the Nickel coin was actually worth 6 cents due to it’s nickel content. I’m going to be rich- woohoo!

Not so fast.  Because of this phenomena where the metallic content of a nickel has risen to as much as 7 cents, the treasury department has passed further policies to reinforce the existing laws against “currency desecration” back in 2006 with increased penalties. 

huh- fascinating.
I always wondered a little bit why they had that fluting.
Thanks for the info.
I imagine that would have had to have been a full time “hobby” to break even!

Not necessarily.  Gold was so valuable that it was worth their while just to place a bunch of gold coins in a bag and shake them up so they can “sweat” the coins and keep the tiny flakes of gold which may result.  Also, silver was valuable enough that a better-off peasant* can add a nice supplement to his/her day job of farming or performing some craftwork in the off-season. 

Also, “sweating” gold coins and coin-clipping became a serious enough problem that successive monarchs and their governments passed laws and often acted to make public examples of those who were accused and found guilty by the dubious courts of their day. 

* Assuming, of course, s(he) wasn’t a serf.

Comment #30: exholt  on  05/18  at  08:26 PM

White conservativism remains the hemorrhoid on the ass of America.

Comment #31: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  05/18  at  08:33 PM

New Scientist magazine (a British weekly that is kind of like The Economist for science) has a special issue on denialism this week.  Haven’t read the whole thing yet, but it shows how all the various denialisms have the same basic patterns and roots.  From vaccines to slavery, it offers a way for innumerate people to feel they control the world, not “experts.”

Here’s a link - the articles I checked seem to all be in front of the subscriber wall - New Scientist - Living in Denial

Comment #32: East of Weston  on  05/18  at  08:43 PM

I wonder if part of this has to do with paranoia that the more educated someone is, the more likely they are to be liberal.  Except they’re blaming this proposition on the allegedly liberal content of the education and not the educational process itself (which involves learning to question things, like the truth of something a republican politician says, the idea that gay marriage will somehow ruin anything, or the existence of god).

It’s classic republican projection or I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I-ism—implying that liberals are the ones who’ve been brainwashed into believing things that are demonstrably untrue.

Comment #33: ryang  on  05/18  at  08:45 PM

These are the same people who yell, “U-S-A U-S-A!” and about how we’re Number 1 in everything. And as we fall farther behind in math and science and our roads, buildings and societal bonds get weaker, these ignorant good for nothing assholes will once again yell that the path to (their idea of) redemption is through God.  So they’ll do things like this which will give us a weaker and less well prepared generation of kids and by the time some of these kids will discover how much bullshit that they were taught, it’ll be too late.  By then, China will hold more of our bonds, more of our industry will be overseas, and the few kids that did well in science will basically be working for a weapons manufacturer.  As things get worse, they’ll blame liberals and gays and abortion more and more meanwhile doing the same action that is making the country as a whole worse. 
I told my friends but it isn’t popular with them (even if they’re all liberal) that if you don’t believe in evolution, you should lose the right to vote.  This is what happens when you give people too stupid to breathe any power or opportunity other than manual labor jobs. They end up dragging all of us down with them.

Comment #34: crepes not hate  on  05/18  at  08:48 PM

the politicians, publishing corporations, textbook authors who side with those corporations, school board officials, educrats, etc will fight tooth and nail to minimize and eliminate those positives and accentuate the negatives

Yeah, stubborn incumbents and vested interests are a given. In this case, the commonality of the stakeholders is the interest of the GOP to continue preserving the Texas system, for the glory of Jeebus, the Confederacy, and the Almighty Buck.

greater restrictions through hardware/software lockdowns not only for censorship/book banning purposes…but also to help those publishing corporations by moving to a rent per use economic model rather than own and use according to discretion of buyer or those s(he) lends book to.

True, and I’m assuming that the various levels of DRM and spyware will be in place even on a non-dedicated device—school administrators are control freaks, as we saw with that spycam case.

What I’m getting at is a situation where, say, Massachusetts says “screw these textbook companies and their pandering to wingnut Texas—they can either offer a reality-based version or we’ll do it ourselves” (presumably based on respected open-source texts).

Texas dominates right now because it doesn’t make economic sense for publishers to print up and distribute X copies of “Land of the Free - Grade 6 Civics” for Texas and similar reality-challenged states and Y copies of the same book for others. Take printing and materials and transport costs down to where they don’t matter, and different editions with different editing and even different content become more feasible, especially if there’s demand from states that take education seriously.

A reason why I am not too enthused about electronic books/tablets…...especially when one ebook company has already demonstrated one of the above mentioned negatives by deleting books which didn’t pass some sort of IP muster without any notification…much less consent of the electronic book owners.

Unfortunately, I just don’t think we’re going to see a standardised e-book solution in any given public school district without all those lock-downs. I’m looking at this more on a state-by-state basis, where the various e-texts are on the device based on an IP-rights contract with districts or the state as a whole. Currently, Texas’s contract with the publisher determines what appears on the dead-tree “devices” of students in every other state, and no-one can delete them.

Anyhow, I don’t know the future, but as with others here I’m doing the Picard facepalm and wondering if there’s any way to keep the textbook crazy in Texas.

Comment #35: Gracchus.  on  05/18  at  09:04 PM

I told my friends but it isn’t popular with them (even if they’re all liberal) that if you don’t believe in evolution, you should lose the right to vote.  This is what happens when you give people too stupid to breathe any power or opportunity other than manual labor jobs. They end up dragging all of us down with them.
Comment #34: crepes not hate on 05/18 at 06:48 PM

Why should liberals want to institute a voting test?

Stupidity isn’t the only or even primary reason people reject evolution.  More often, it’s intellectual laziness, encouraged by those who benefit from ignorance in the general population.

Comment #36: oldfeminist  on  05/18  at  09:05 PM

I told my friends but it isn’t popular with them (even if they’re all liberal) that if you don’t believe in evolution, you should lose the right to vote.

Nah, you start putting restrictions on the right to vote, and before you know it you’re back in the realm of poll taxes and other tests designed to discriminate on bases other than stupidity and intellectual sloth. I have zero respect for Americans who don’t “believe” in evolution, but they get their votes.

There are better and, ultimately, more effective targets when it comes to saying “this is why you can’t have nice things”—examples of nice things including a news outlet’s brand credibility or a political candidate’s gravitas. Messing with “one person, one vote” is a really bad idea.

Comment #37: Gracchus.  on  05/18  at  09:19 PM

Here’s my take on slavery denialism: it’s mostly religious-based.  I came to this conclusion recently when I heard Pat Robertson blame the earthquake in Haiti on a deal with the devil to free the Haitian slaves from the French.  Christians, especially conservative Christians have viewed slavery as freeing black people from Africa and their pagan religion and their slavery was part of their debt to the white Christians for saving them.  Emancipation made them angry, so the KKK (which was founded on Christmas Eve 1865) was an attempt by the Christian Right to try to keep them in their place.  Then segregation and Jim Crow Laws were put in place to further the punishment on blacks for the audacity to want freedom.

Sadly and ironically, the same Christians who supported slavery a century and a half ago and segregation later have credited Christianity for the end of those institutions.  But we know the truth.

Comment #38: Albert Cirrus  on  05/18  at  09:42 PM

For those who want to feel slightly better, it’s a bit too late for them to entirely shut the door on reality. Most every kid these days has access to the internet and if even the most control freak parent can’t stop them accessing porn, they sure as hell can’t stop them accessing wikipedia and other factual sources.

Hell, I remember my textbooks a decade and so ago having some suspicious crap in it, but they were only one part of my education suite at the time which was supplemented by internet and other resources.

And this crap and the rest of it just makes kids that much more suspicious of authority and more likely to break out on their own to try and find out what’s really up.

The downsides are numerous and many and this shit needs to be cleaned up, but their hopes of shutting down the fountain of knowledge is about an internet too late. Sort of like how they completed taking over TV and print media just in time for most young people to get all their information online.

Comment #39: Cerberus  on  05/18  at  09:42 PM

Yeah, you guys are right. I was being hyperbolic because I was incensed. I only say that when I read one of these stories.
  Once you go down taking people’s votes away then next time, someone will take your vote away and someone elses’ vote away because they’re not deemed to be American enough, or they’re thought to be fat or they believe in one God over another and any number of ideas.  So, on a rational basis, I don’t believe that at all.  I know the history of the poll tax (which Texas might muddy up now) so it doesn’t lead anywhere good.
On an emotional basis, I can’t believe that we’re at this point.  So many people died struggling and fighting for our country to advance to this stage and these malicious stupid people keep on trying to turn the clock back.  What kind of world do these people think we will have if their dreams come true?  Look at Afghanistan and/or Somalia but switch the religion. Women don’t have rights, the society is not dynamic, and much of the population is under the heel of religious nutcases, violence is epidemic and education is non-existent or crumbling.

Comment #40: crepes not hate  on  05/18  at  09:46 PM

If I was running a school district, we wouldn’t be buying new textbooks for a while.

I think too many schools buy too many new books too often, anyway. The money would be better spent on retaining the best teachers. A good teacher with old books can do more good than a poor one with new books.

Comment #41: ttintagel  on  05/18  at  09:47 PM

#38

I don’t think that religion can be entirely blamed. Libertarian ideology sort of lends itself to deny the existence of slavery. They believe that the market, without government interference, sets everything at its perfect price. So if something exists, it should exist. This sort of reasoning is used to deny the existence of racism and sexism today, so it isn’t much of a stretch to apply that paradigm and conclude that the cost of slave labor was just worth $0 or else the slaves would have just gotten better jobs.

Comment #42: alysia  on  05/18  at  09:48 PM

I’d go further: religion is the cover. There are plenty of religious people (even ignoring the, um, religious people of color who have preached rather eloquently about slavery) who hold no brief for slavery. Some religious groups were crucialpartsof the abolitionist movement.

In every place and time at least some relligious sects take on the tribal beliefs of their adherents, and that’s what’s going on with slavery-denial.

And yeah, the whole “triangular trade” thing is something of a crock as usually framed. The story we got when I was in school strongly implied that it was the same ships, and that this was a profitable way for them not to travel empty.  Lying and evil.

Comment #43: paul  on  05/18  at  09:58 PM

I said “mostly” religious-based and the libertarian-(right) motivation for slavery came mostly in the early 19 Century when the government started to regulate slavery.  Before that, slave-owners and their fellow travelers loved the government.

Comment #44: Albert Cirrus  on  05/18  at  10:01 PM

Okay, what DID they ship back in those ships?  I know captains hate to sail empty.

Comment #45: Eric_RoM  on  05/18  at  10:19 PM

Shouldn’t California, New York, and Illinois textbook standards balance this out (along with moderateish Florida)?

Comment #46: Ben D.  on  05/18  at  10:20 PM

Any sign of Texas getting tired of these morons?

Comment #47: Eric_RoM  on  05/18  at  10:26 PM

Ben @ 46.  Traditionally, the Texas standards have an outsized influence because books are ordered (or just approved?) centrally for all Texas schools—- I don’t think that’s true for CA, NY or IL.  I did read that, in the modern digital age, it’s become easier for publishers to have multiple editions; one for TX and one for the saner parts of the US…

Comment #48: topometropolis  on  05/18  at  10:29 PM

Isaac Newton ought to be right up the denialists’ alley. He was not only the Master of the Mint for many years, and very proactive about hanging coin-clippers, and much more proactive about hanging counterfeiters, but he spent most of his time at the Mint doing batshit crazy alchemical research. He abandoned his project to make sense out of the Principia in order to concentrate on finding the Philosopher’s Stone so that he could join other famous alchemists in eternal life. He was a true believer.

Comment #49: felagund  on  05/18  at  11:07 PM

This really depresses me.  I grew up in Texas, and history, while conservative, wasn’t totally made-up-crazy.  I can’t imagine my 8th grade History teacher spreading this nonsense, but I guess that’s what people like her will have to do to keep their jobs.

Comment #50: t-ster  on  05/18  at  11:23 PM

“Okay class, for your Fall and Spring semester finals each student will write two research papers 9about 10 pages) fact-checking our textbook. Each student will choose two topics from the textbook and use at least 5 outside sources to confirm, amend, or contradict the content of our textbook.”

Teachers of Texas unite!

Comment #51: history_mom  on  05/19  at  12:31 AM

scientific advances through military technology

You know, a little more focus on there wouldn’t be such a bad thing, if only to expose people to exactly how much of our economy is basically the military in one way or another (hint: staggering) and also about how research gets applied to both military and civilian purposes.  Obviously, that’s not the spirit of this particular law, and you shouldn’t drop Newton to do it, but if done properly that would make an excellent topic in some high school class somewhere.

But yeah, the way they got it is freakishly Orwellian.

Comment #52: Kyso K  on  05/19  at  01:11 AM

I’m sad that Ape Man got to the “slippery slope” observation before I did. :p (I guess it no longer matters that your spherical cow is frictionless…)

But yeah, if there’s no gravity now, apparently, is Texas Instruments gonna stop including the ability to graph parabolas on their calculators? 9.9

Comment #53: Bagelsan  on  05/19  at  01:44 AM

#46

They balance it out by printing the damn facts.

Comment #54: Albert Cirrus  on  05/19  at  02:05 AM

“Okay class, for your Fall and Spring semester finals each student will write two research papers 9about 10 pages) fact-checking our textbook. Each student will choose two topics from the textbook and use at least 5 outside sources to confirm, amend, or contradict the content of our textbook.”

Teachers of Texas unite!

Question from mainstream entitled middle/upper-class US student similar to the “Real American” children these folks want to protect from “furriners” according to teacher friends:

Umm, like in the two semesters…..will we be covering a quarter of the book, half a book…*shudder*, or the *gasp!* entire book.

Oh yeah, is that 9-10 pages for both papers or 9-10 each? Like, can I work on them with my friends…like, even online ones? Umm…when you say outside sources…......... would that include wikipedia, sparknotes, cliffnotes, Cheat’R'US, etc? Huh?!! What do you mean they’re not allowed?!! You said outside sources!!! (Whiny tantrum).

Comment #55: exholt  on  05/19  at  02:09 AM

The new curriculum asserts that “the right to keep and bear arms” is an important element of a democratic society.

Huh.  They should perhaps examine other democracies of the world include in their constitutional arrangements a “right to keep and bear arms”.  I’ll give you a clue - none. 

I was about to joke that these people must therefore think that USA is the only democracy in the world, and then I realised that they probably do.

Comment #56: Katherine  on  05/19  at  07:16 AM

@alysia 42

“I don’t think that religion can be entirely blamed. Libertarian ideology sort of lends itself to deny the existence of slavery. They believe that the market, without government interference, sets everything at its perfect price. So if something exists, it should exist. This sort of reasoning is used to deny the existence of racism and sexism today, so it isn’t much of a stretch to apply that paradigm and conclude that the cost of slave labor was just worth $0 or else the slaves would have just gotten better jobs. “

This is ignorant.  Libertarian ideology first and foremost is about the freedom of the individual, and slavery is by definition in opposition to that.  By your logic, libertarians would argue that big government should exist because it….exists.  Libertarians do not deny that racism exists, just look at all of the articles on reason.com about how the new Arizona immigration law invites racial profiling (not to mention the years worth of archives about the racist drug war).

Comment #57: anoNY  on  05/19  at  08:58 AM

#58

This is ignorant.  Libertarian ideology first and foremost is about the freedom of the individual, and slavery is by definition in opposition to that.  By your logic, libertarians would argue that big government should exist because it….exists.

The point is that if libertarians were able to institute the policies they desire (no regulation of commerce, no welfare state, a government used only for defense), you would only end up with a new kind of slavery. (Or, possibly a failed state.)

Comment #58: atheist  on  05/19  at  09:09 AM

“The point is that if libertarians were able to institute the policies they desire (no regulation of commerce, no welfare state, a government used only for defense), you would only end up with a new kind of slavery. (Or, possibly a failed state.) “

Actually, government in libertarian theory is used for both defense AND policing of internal relationships, including protecting people from slavery.  Perhaps I am not understanding your term “new slavery?”

Comment #59: anoNY  on  05/19  at  09:42 AM

Perhaps I am not understanding your term “new slavery?”

I don’t know about atheist’s understanding. I’m thinking more “company towns” and “debt servitude” which are, unfortunately, old forms of slavery that still exist. Reality-based libertarians and some anarchists can acknowledge that government isn’t the only agent of tyranny, and can conceive of private entities that enslave people both with the collusion of the state (e.g. the CSA) or in its absence (e.g. the modern-day Horn of Africa), as well as points in between.

Whoops, forgot ... we’re talking about standard American Libertarian theory. The state is evil, but the corporation can do no wrong. Carry on ...

Comment #60: Gracchus.  on  05/19  at  10:00 AM

I think the “slavery denialists” logic runs more like this:

Slavery wasn’t all that bad, it had its good points.

Slavery being bad and discrimination resulting from it are mostly in the heads of liberals and blacks.

Since they have nothing really to complain about, they’re just whining about things and too lazy to work.

What the liberals and blacks really want is what existed during slavery—a paternalistic socialist state that controls everyone and give them what they want.

(I know, the logic is tortured, and it is historically incorrect, but I think that’s how many of them see it.)

Comment #61: steve arrants  on  05/19  at  10:03 AM

Andrew Shlafly and his mother are the perfect example of Poe’s law in action.  I always flip back and forth between believing that they are the most extreme wingnuts, or just complete hilarious parodies of wingnuts.

Anyway, lately I have been really into reading about the Quiverfull movement.  For those who aren’t familiar, it’s basically a cult where a woman has as many kids as possible and homeschools them all according to very strict guidelines set by a guy named Bill Gothard.  There are many horrible details that I won’t go into now, but their idea of homeschooling is very different than the average homeschooler.  It’s hard to educate 10 children of varying ages when you are constantly either pregnant or caring for an infant.  So they have these little worksheets and pamphlets and they are just full of this type of propaganda.  Those kids don’t learn about Martin Luther King Jr., and they learn that slavery existed but that it was extremely minimal and just a few isolate cases.  They obviously don’t learn about evolution, and they’re not bit on science in general.  What’s really scary is that this latest Texas School Board revision is eerily similar to what these fringe wingnut groups are doing.  It’s being made more mainstream and it’s really worth worrying about because I’ve seen what this kind of thinking leads to.

Comment #62: bananacat  on  05/19  at  10:09 AM

“Actually, government in libertarian theory is used for both defense AND policing of internal relationships, including protecting people from slavery.  Perhaps I am not understanding your term “new slavery?””

How about this:
You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don’t you call me ‘cause I can’t go
I owe my soul to the company store
- 16 Tons

Or are you such a soulless Randbot you just can’t understand?...

Comment #63: MikeEss  on  05/19  at  10:10 AM

anONY,

Think about how things were during the Industrial Revolution.  That’s what many libertarians want to go back to.  They want corporations to be free to require 80 hour work weeks, and to pay wages that are so low it becomes impossible for people to support themselves and their families.  I’m sure some of them don’t even like the safety regulations that are now required.  They’d like to be able to lock fire exits to keep their factory workers from taking any breaks.  It becomes de facto slavery pretty damn fast.  They won’t ever call it slavery because the people could theoretically quit their terrible, oppressive job, except that all jobs would be equally slave-like and they wouldn’t have any real options.  They wouldn’t be legally required to work there, and that is supposed to make it somehow better.  Libertarians think that the magical free market would change everything and people would just refuse to work at dangerous and oppressive jobs and employers would be forced to make things better just to get anyone to work there, but that is completely naive because there will always be someone desperate enough to risk their life to feed their kids.  And it wouldn’t take long before the entire libertarian system became set-up so that the slave or peasant class could never attain anything else.  They would be paid so little and work such long hours that they could never afford even basic education for themselves or their children, and it would continue in that cycle.  Libertarianism is the worst example of the meritocracy myth, because it assumes that the market is rational and that both companies and people survive based solely on their work ethic.

Comment #64: bananacat  on  05/19  at  10:17 AM

#60

Actually, government in libertarian theory is used for both defense AND policing of internal relationships, including protecting people from slavery.  Perhaps I am not understanding your term “new slavery?”

What I’m saying is very similar to what Gracchus is saying in #61. If libertarian ideas were put into practice, you’d just end up with “debt servitude”, and probably much worse abuses of human rights. Libertarian ideologues would be able to easily re-brand these abuses as being the mysterious workings of The Market. Under a libertarian system, human rights abusers, while theoretically stopped by the vestiges of “The State”, would actually be able to operate with impunity, and would be able to pay private armies to exterminate their critics, or pay off media companies not to run stories about their abuses. In essence, without a fairly strong state to force people to act somewhat morally, humanity would return to its “natural” state, which is slavery, predation and war.

Comment #65: atheist  on  05/19  at  10:18 AM

@64

I understand that you are saying that worker was in a debt spiral.  Was the worker forced to work there, or did he or she choose to?  I for one would not join a corporation that was going to pay me in scrip.  I’m still waiting for a definition of “new slavery” that doesn’t involve some form of consent of the “slave.”

Comment #66: anoNY  on  05/19  at  10:22 AM

anONY,

Don’t try to tell me that it’s ok for companies to treat their employees like crap simply because the employee is theoretically allowed to leave if they don’t like it.  I could just as easily say that if you don’t like the laws in a certain state, you are free to move to a different one so they can do whatever they want.  You are simply being naive.

Comment #67: bananacat  on  05/19  at  10:27 AM

#67

I for one would not join a corporation that was going to pay me in scrip.  I’m still waiting for a definition of “new slavery” that doesn’t involve some form of consent of the “slave.”

Really, you wouldn’t join a corporation that was going to pay you in scrip, if the choice was to do that or starve? Color me very skeptical, anonNY.

The point I am making is that to call a person given that choice (work for a horrible employer, or starve), does not have what could accurately be called consent. They have their desire to live and their hatred of slavery. Guess which is going to win.

Comment #68: atheist  on  05/19  at  10:28 AM

New Scientist magazine (a British weekly that is kind of like The Economist for science) has a special issue on denialism this week.  Haven’t read the whole thing yet, but it shows how all the various denialisms have the same basic patterns and roots.  From vaccines to slavery, it offers a way for innumerate people to feel they control the world, not “experts.”

Here’s a link - the articles I checked seem to all be in front of the subscriber wall - New Scientist - Living in Denial

thanks for posting that East.  Interesting articles.

Comment #69: Woodrowfan  on  05/19  at  10:30 AM

“They want corporations to be free to require 80 hour work weeks, and to pay wages that are so low it becomes impossible for people to support themselves and their families. “

Why don’t all corporations pay minimum wage right now?  They are allowed to pay their employees $7.25 an hour (or a bit more in come states), why don’t they all currently pay that wage?

Comment #70: anoNY  on  05/19  at  10:31 AM

Umm, like in the two semesters…..will we be covering a quarter of the book, half a book…*shudder*, or the *gasp!* entire book.
Oh yeah, is that 9-10 pages for both papers or 9-10 each? Like, can I work on them with my friends…like, even online ones?

exholt, it may stun you quite a bit, but one of the advantages that the upper middle classes have on the school system is that small class size makes it more conducive regularly handing out essay assignments. At elite colleges, this is one place where middle class public school graduates found themselves at a disadvantage to many of their peers: they had much less experience in essay writing. (granted, I am kind of curious how history_mom thinks she’s going to grade that many papers)

I know you seem to have a vested interest in deriding people who grew up economically better off than you as especially lazy, but the truth is that while upper middle class American teens do have to be dragged kicking and screaming into writing often and competently, they at least are lucky enough to have someone willing to drag them there. In most other school systems, teachers would never be able to grade that many essays and still get any sleep, and the very idea of regular essay writing would be considered an idea from Mars by the students.

If you don’t mind, could you please stop turning every thread tangentially related to education into an opportunity to vent about your personal issues? You sound like you had a tough time of it and managed to barely make it into a middle classish job that allows you to support yourself. But you’re also in your 30s and need to learn to let go of all of that high school and college era baggage.

Comment #71: Tyro  on  05/19  at  10:33 AM

“The point I am making is that to call a person given that choice (work for a horrible employer, or starve), does not have what could accurately be called consent. “

Well, if that is the only choice, then I agree with you.  However, you limit yourself by taking as a given that that is the only choice.

Comment #72: anoNY  on  05/19  at  10:33 AM

I for one would not join a corporation that was going to pay me in scrip.

ah, the egotism of the libertarian.  “Well, I wouldn’t do that!”.  Yes, you would.  If all the local companies paid in script and family ties bound you to the area, which is what often happened.  plus, some areas had laws in place that forbade workers with debts to move, no matter how small the debt.  Some people DID move, usually young single men with no obligations, but that didn’t help the majority who had no such realistic options.

Comment #73: Woodrowfan  on  05/19  at  10:34 AM

“Don’t try to tell me that it’s ok for companies to treat their employees like crap simply because the employee is theoretically allowed to leave if they don’t like it.  I could just as easily say that if you don’t like the laws in a certain state, you are free to move to a different one so they can do whatever they want.  You are simply being naive. “

The employee is not “theoretically” allowed to leave, they are literally allowed to leave.  I agree that you could just as easily say that I could stay or leave a state if I don’t like the laws, but I can also stay and try to get the laws changed.  I am not sure how that analogy helps your argument.

Comment #74: anoNY  on  05/19  at  10:38 AM

What kind of world do these people think we will have if their dreams come true?  Look at Afghanistan and/or Somalia but switch the religion. Women don’t have rights, the society is not dynamic, and much of the population is under the heel of religious nutcases, violence is epidemic and education is non-existent or crumbling.

Oh, but the USA is ~*~CHRISTIAN~*~ so that could never happen.

Comment #75: Rebecca  on  05/19  at  10:38 AM

I for one would not join a corporation that was going to pay me in scrip.

Just like how i’m sure if you were a slave you’d never blindly obey the dictates of the master and would run away to freedom. Just like how you wouldn’t have buckled under to the restrictions of Jim Crow and would have changed the system. Just like you would have negotiated a better wage for yourself in the coal mine and managed to climb up the management ladder.

Comment #76: Tyro  on  05/19  at  10:41 AM

“If all the local companies paid in script and family ties bound you to the area, which is what often happened.  plus, some areas had laws in place that forbade workers with debts to move, no matter how small the debt. “

If…If…  If we all had a pony….  If all of the local companies paid in scrip, then the first company to start paying in something more valuable would not only be able to poach workers from the other firms, they would also probably have to pay less and thus be able to compete better.  Furthermore, you mention laws against moving as if those laws would be re-enacted in this day and age.  You have to realize that I am not advocating a return to the robber baron era (and I bet most libertarians would agree).  I think that the current state of affairs could become more libertarian without “going back” to any era in history.

Comment #77: anoNY  on  05/19  at  10:44 AM

Of course libertarians could and would make an argument supporting slavery if it came back.  You’re all about property rights, right?  Since slavery is based on redefining some people as property, then slavery fits neatly in there.  And once that’s accepted, the libertarian stance is that slaves should have no rights at all, since they are property and belong entirely to the owner.  Just take libertarian attitudes about the environment that we all have to live in, and apply it to actual human beings.

Comment #78: Amanda Marcotte  on  05/19  at  10:45 AM

Reality-based libertarians and some anarchists can acknowledge that government isn’t the only agent of tyranny

*All* anarchists acknowledge that government isn’t the only agent of tyranny. The basis of anarchist theory is at the root an opposition to capitalism, and the state is only opposed in that as a structure it is only ever suited to promote a class domination society (of which capitalism is only the most recent expression). Modern so-called anarcho-capitalists aren’t anarchists, they’re rebranded ultra-libertarians who colonized the term ‘anarchist’ by taking an incidental feature of it (its opposition to the state, which is important only in that it is the main feature that distinguishes us from the other strains of socialism/communism and is not the main objective) and making it *the* central theme.

I agree that you could just as easily say that I could stay or leave a state if I don’t like the laws, but I can also stay and try to get the laws changed.

Just like I can stay and team up with my fellow workers to try to take over the enterprise and turn the means of production over to those who actually use them and not those who profit from barring access to them.

Corporations don’t create work. They create *jobs*. A job is the effective barring off of potential workers from the work that needs done through state intervention (absentee landlordism and other forms of property rights that are unnatural and can only be propped up by the state apparatus) so you can create artificial scarcity of work, and thus charge more (take more plusvalue… or any plusvalue, since in a truly free market nobody would find working for someone else to be economically efficient) from the people you hire.

Comment #79: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  10:47 AM

I mean, is there any doubt that Megan McArdle, for instance, could be prompted to write apologies for slave owning if she thought there was any social support for it whatsoever?  I can tell you that anonNY would, from his writings here.  Libertarian ideology depends on what is defined as what.  Like I said, libertarians use “private property” as justification for polluting water and air that everyone has to breathe.  Simply defining some classes of people as not-people would make slavery a comfortable fit for libertarianism, which is is of course why there’s quite a bit of overlap between economic libertarians and “states’ rights” folks who are basically apologists for slavery.

Comment #80: Amanda Marcotte  on  05/19  at  10:49 AM

If all of the local companies paid in scrip, then the first company to start paying in something more valuable would not only be able to poach workers from the other firms,

Proving the point made above that if something existed, then it could not possibly have been against the free market and thus shouldn’t be opposed, or if something was distasteful to libertarian sensibilities, then it couldn’t have existed.

The late 1800s were the libertarian fantasy era, to the point where even modern libertarian economists insist that this era was the high point of “freedom” in America, but nothing describing of the actual ways people lived and were treated sounds very “free” to me.

Comment #81: Tyro  on  05/19  at  10:49 AM

“Of course libertarians could and would make an argument supporting slavery if it came back.  You’re all about property rights, right?  Since slavery is based on redefining some people as property, then slavery fits neatly in there.  And once that’s accepted, the libertarian stance is that slaves should have no rights at all, since they are property and belong entirely to the owner.  Just take libertarian attitudes about the environment that we all have to live in, and apply it to actual human beings. “

Amanda, I already pointed out that the foundation of libertarianism is individual freedom.  You are smarter than your above post suggests.

Comment #82: anoNY  on  05/19  at  10:56 AM

The employee is not “theoretically” allowed to leave, they are literally allowed to leave.

You are also literally allowed to leave the state or country.  The thing is that you can vote to change laws you don’t like, but you can’t do that in a company.

Why don’t all corporations pay minimum wage right now?  They are allowed to pay their employees $7.25 an hour (or a bit more in come states), why don’t they all currently pay that wage?

Are you really trying to tell me that it would be ok to pay someone $0.50 an hour simply because there are others out there who are making far more?  And actually government regulation is one of the reasons that people have the power to demand higher wages.  Our government guarantees us a basic education and when we get higher education, government regulation makes sure that we are getting something for our money.  Of course there are plenty of problems with our education system, but it’s far better than the libertarian paradise where children can’t even learn to read because they are busy working to supplement their parents’ income.  And if competition is so perfect, do you think that every employer would choose to pay a living wage if they weren’t required to do so?  And how the hell did we get on the topic of libertarianism anyway?  Do you really think that what we need here is to give public education more freedom about what they teach?  We’d end up with douches like this teaching complete young-earth creationism if we didn’t have any governmental power to stop them from doing it.

Comment #83: bananacat  on  05/19  at  10:59 AM

“Just like I can stay and team up with my fellow workers to try to take over the enterprise and turn the means of production over to those who actually use them and not those who profit from barring access to them. “

This would be a violation of the property rights of the owners of those means of production.  Me staying in a state to try to get its laws changed is not a violation of anyone’s rights.  Interesting info about anarchy though, a subject I know little about.

Comment #84: anoNY  on  05/19  at  10:59 AM

I already pointed out that the foundation of libertarianism is individual freedom

Then why is it that in cases where individual freedom conflicts with private property rights, libertarians always side with private property rights?

Comment #85: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  10:59 AM

Amanda, I already pointed out that the foundation of libertarianism is individual freedom. 

You can say it, but that doesn’t make it true. The heroes of the libertarian fantasy era had a seething hatred, which manfested itself as deadly violence, for actually individuals. This violent hatred of individuals and citizens is the reason that the foundations pf libertarianism were destroyed during the progressive era.

That hatred of human dignity and hatred of individuals by libertarians manifested itself last night when libertarian fantasy man Rand Paul refused to take a congratulatory phone call from Grayson. It is a philosophy openly contemptuous of the dignity of the individual.

What is interesting is how you defensively declared that you would never accept payment in scrip. You never said that you would refuse to pay others in scrip, because the truth is that you would, and like your libertarian forebears would have shot and killed any of your workers who objected.

Comment #86: Tyro  on  05/19  at  11:02 AM

This would be a violation of the property rights of the owners of those means of production.

Damn right it would be a violation of the capitalist’s artificial, arbitrary, statist definition of property rights.

The only natural rights basis for property rights is usufruct.

Comment #87: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  11:02 AM

“Are you really trying to tell me that it would be ok to pay someone $0.50 an hour simply because there are others out there who are making far more?  “

Did I say that?  A commenter said that if there were no regulation, companies would pay people like crap.  I replied that companies are only legally required to pay $7.25, but most pay far more than that.  I asked why this was if all of these companies were not obligated to pay more. 

“Of course there are plenty of problems with our education system, but it’s far better than the libertarian paradise where children can’t even learn to read because they are busy working to supplement their parents’ income.  “

Here is another of those false choices.  Either we have government education or children will not learn to read.  I don’t understand why you think it is the libertarian dream to have kids who can’t read.

“And how the hell did we get on the topic of libertarianism anyway?

See comment #42

Comment #88: anoNY  on  05/19  at  11:04 AM

If all of the local companies paid in scrip, then the first company to start paying in something more valuable would not only be able to poach workers from the other firms,

no, because workers were not free to jump companies.  They’d be in debt to the original company for rent or groceries.  Leaving would be against the law. Plus, the new company would be blacklisted by the other neighboring companies and unable to ship their product, buy supplies, etc.

Alas, the problem with arguing with libertarians is that they are not talking about the real world.  The only person that makes slavery possible is NOT the slave, it’s the slave-owner with a gun..

Comment #89: Woodrowfan  on  05/19  at  11:07 AM

Then why is it that in cases where individual freedom conflicts with private property rights, libertarians always side with private property rights?

I blame poor toilet-training….

Comment #90: Woodrowfan  on  05/19  at  11:08 AM

Here is another of those false choices.  Either we have government education or children will not learn to read.  I don’t understand why you think it is the libertarian dream to have kids who can’t read.

In the libertarian fantasy land, it is not offensive if the poor and destitute can’t afford to teach their children to read while others can do so and take advantage of modern society. The only offense would be if the government used tax money to teach people to read, to the point where if the poor and destitute demanded such a thing, the libertarians would either use the government or hire private companies to come out and shoot them.

Comment #91: Tyro  on  05/19  at  11:08 AM

“Then why is it that in cases where individual freedom conflicts with private property rights, libertarians always side with private property rights? “

Which cases?  Private property rights ARE individual freedoms.

Comment #92: anoNY  on  05/19  at  11:11 AM

Private property rights ARE individual freedoms.

And that, my friend, is why we call you “propertarians.”

Comment #93: Tyro  on  05/19  at  11:13 AM

“Alas, the problem with arguing with libertarians is that they are not talking about the real world. “

Wait, you create this “libertarian” fantasy where companies all compete to pay less than each other, and you accuse ME of not talking about the real world?

“They’d be in debt to the original company for rent or groceries.  Leaving would be against the law.”

Leaving would be against the law if the government had laws prohibiting leaving.

Comment #94: anoNY  on  05/19  at  11:14 AM

I replied that companies are only legally required to pay $7.25, but most pay far more than that.  I asked why this was if all of these companies were not obligated to pay more.

In fields that have not been Taylorized to death (yet), there might not be enough workers around to be able to pay them nothing. Also, unions.

Of course as long as there is one cent of profit, that is one cent that was not paid to the actual producers… the workers. Ergo, that is one cent that was skimmed and kept in the pockets of a parasite because of the artificial statist construction of ‘property rights’ called capitalism.

But that is something that still dazzle some naive white collar workers (in particular, in the IT field) who think they are above the level of mere proles. “I make 75K$ a year” is a lot less impressive when you remind them how many billions in profits their companies made off their work, all money which is at least partly theirs by right… not to mention a large chunk of the salaries of the useless middle-to-upper level management who only exist as parasites on producers and don’t provide anything of real value. It is also a lot less impressive when you remind them that that wage has been stagnant for years and will likely fall to unskilled workers level as soon as the higher ups figure out how to make a machine that does 90% of their coding work… Taylorization is an inevitable future for all workers. Machinists used to be the cream of the crop of the skilled workers, and their fate is the same the code monkeys will eventually have as well. At least the machinists were unionized…

Comment #95: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  11:15 AM

If all of the local companies paid in scrip, then the first company to start paying in something more valuable would not only be able to poach workers from the other firms,

Economics 101 fail. The first company to start paying in something more valuable (and why would they?) would be subject to the free choice of all the other companies in the region to stop doing business with it until it either went under or reverted to scrip. A good chapter on price wars will give you the gist.

One of the problems with the stupid version of libertarianism is the failure to recognize that interactions among players are repeated. The iterated prisoner’s dilemma has a rather different outcome from the memoryless version.

Comment #96: paul  on  05/19  at  11:15 AM

“And that, my friend, is why we call you “propertarians.” “

So you are anti- private property rights?  How would that lead to a better world where people are freer than a world where people actually have strong rights in their property?

Comment #97: anoNY  on  05/19  at  11:17 AM

Which cases?  Private property rights ARE individual freedoms.

http://c4ss.org/content/1967

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absentee_landlord

Private property rights are a legal (read: statist) fiction.

Comment #98: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  11:20 AM

BTW: I will not secretly relish the irony of computer programmers becoming neo-Luddite machine breakers the very day that some company comes up with an automated code writer.

That’s *when*, not *if*.

Comment #99: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  11:25 AM

Property rights are recognized on sufferance by the government so long as they do not interfere with human dignity and raising of public living standards. Libertarians place property rights over rights of human dignity and self determination.

Libertarians are right about one thing: sooner or later, the government has to start shooting to enforce its laws. Libertarians have never gotten over the fact that the government decided it was not worthwhile to start shooting at workers on the libertarians’ say-so.

Comment #100: Tyro  on  05/19  at  11:26 AM

“Why don’t all corporations pay minimum wage right now?  They are allowed to pay their employees $7.25 an hour (or a bit more in come states), why don’t they all currently pay that wage?”

Wages in real dollars have fallen significantly since the 1980’s. Through the Bush years (and he WAS a libertarian’s dream as far as his economic policies went - the libertarian paradise he sought in the Middle East is a statement of that), raises were invariable well below the increases in cost-of-living, and the majority of large companies and municipalities have frozen or cut wages in the last 2 years.

It may take them some time, but they will get there.

Comment #101: paleotectonics  on  05/19  at  11:30 AM

Afghanistan is Asia.

Fuck. Need coffee.

Comment #102: paleotectonics  on  05/19  at  11:32 AM

As someone who works for an MIC, I feel compelled to point out that it’s kind of hard to teach about military advances without touching on gravity.  Mortors?  Rockets?  Missiles?  Even plain old bullets?  Acceleration, momentum and gravity are kind of key to understanding how those work and what those advances were based on.

Comment #103: helen w. h.  on  05/19  at  11:35 AM

I did read that, in the modern digital age, it’s become easier for publishers to have multiple editions; one for TX and one for the saner parts of the US…

Yes and no. Yes, there are nominally different editions for all the major state markets. But no, the IL, NY, CA books are not substantially better than TX, because the publishers have fired all the editors and writers over the past 5 years, in favor of outsourcing everything to India and China. So you have 10 or so overworked and underpaid people scrambling to meet deadlines crafted for a staff of 50. Not a whole lot gets changed, just the design and the standards listed on the page.

BTW, how much do I love the libertarian ability to insist that shit that happened never happened. Nooo! Companies would never trap employees through debt! What do you mean they already used to do that? Well they wouldn’t do it NOW because shut up that’s why!

Comment #104: Well, what?  on  05/19  at  11:41 AM

libdevil @ 21:
The varying of size and texture on coins IS NOT a relic.  It is so that the visually impaired can use them and not get cheated.

Comment #105: helen w. h.  on  05/19  at  11:41 AM

“Property rights are recognized on sufferance by the government so long as they do not interfere with human dignity and raising of public living standards. Libertarians place property rights over rights of human dignity and self determination. “

Where do property rights interfere with human dignity and self determination, and just whose dignity and self determination are we talking about?  Property owners have just as much interest in their own dignity and self determination as non-owners.

Comment #106: anoNY  on  05/19  at  11:42 AM

Property owners have just as much interest in their own dignity and self determination as non-owners.

Everyone has interest in their own dignity, dumbass. It’s having interest in the dignity of OTHERS that makes you not suck at life.

Comment #107: Well, what?  on  05/19  at  11:45 AM

#105

BTW, how much do I love the libertarian ability to insist that shit that happened never happened. Nooo! Companies would never trap employees through debt! What do you mean they already used to do that? Well they wouldn’t do it NOW because shut up that’s why!

Bottom line, it’s a non-reality-based ideology.

Comment #108: atheist  on  05/19  at  11:48 AM

“Everyone has interest in their own dignity, dumbass. It’s having interest in the dignity of OTHERS that makes you not suck at life. “

Personal insults are fantastic arguments.

Comment #109: anoNY  on  05/19  at  11:52 AM

#90

Alas, the problem with arguing with libertarians is that they are not talking about the real world.  The only person that makes slavery possible is NOT the slave, it’s the slave-owner with a gun..

Woodrowfan, I especially like all the talk about “rights”, from people who want to “drown the state in a bathtub”. If you have no state you have no rights. It’s that fucking simple, morons.

Comment #110: atheist  on  05/19  at  11:59 AM

#110

Personal insults are fantastic arguments.

Insults are a natural response to blockbuster idiocy and self-delusion.

Comment #111: atheist  on  05/19  at  12:02 PM

“If you have no state you have no rights. It’s that fucking simple, morons. “

I agree.  However, it’s more accurate to say that if you have no state, you have fewer options to protect your rights.  The state does not grant rights, it is only a protector of rights.

Comment #112: anoNY  on  05/19  at  12:04 PM

Personal insults are fantastic arguments.

If you can’t handle being called a dumbass while still engaging, you shouldn’t be on the Internet.

Comment #113: Tyro  on  05/19  at  12:07 PM

#113

I agree.

Oh, good. You agree that water is wet, and with no state you have no rights. So then why are you bound and determined to create a situation where the vast majority of people have no rights?

Comment #114: atheist  on  05/19  at  12:11 PM

“Oh, good. You agree that water is wet, and with no state you have no rights. So then why are you bound and determined to create a situation where the vast majority of people have no rights?”

I am not arguing for anarchy.

Comment #115: anoNY  on  05/19  at  12:14 PM

“If you can’t handle being called a dumbass while still engaging, you shouldn’t be on the Internet. “

I can handle being called a dumbass, I just like to point out how effective name-calling is as an argument.

Comment #116: anoNY  on  05/19  at  12:15 PM

@115:
See non-reality based, dumbass, idoicy, self-delusion, etc.  Some your own words.  (or don’t bather trying to force anoNY to admit you’re right, unless you are finding it entertaining; it’s a waste of time.)

Comment #117: helen w. h.  on  05/19  at  12:16 PM

anoNY, this is kinda funny.  You are saying all these things can’t/wouldn’t be/aren’t true, whereas here in the real world it’s actually happened already.  Pick up a history book.  All these things you are saying wouldn’t happen in a libertarian economy, they all happened in the US already.  And a hundred years ago, give or take, a lot of people got killed to change them. 

History fail.

Comment #118: rowmyboat  on  05/19  at  12:19 PM

I am not arguing for anarchy.

You’re arguing for economic anarchy.

Comment #119: atheist  on  05/19  at  12:21 PM

The varying of size and texture on coins IS NOT a relic.  It is so that the visually impaired can use them and not get cheated.

I’m intrigued. Is that provably a result of deliberate design, or could the benefits to the visually impaired merely be a beneficial side effect of other design concerns?

Comment #120: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  12:23 PM

You are saying all these things can’t/wouldn’t be/aren’t true, whereas here in the real world it’s actually happened already.

Libertarianism cannot fail, it can only be failed.

Comment #121: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  12:25 PM

Wait, I thought we were talking about education not the glorious future available to us all if only we could abolish regulation? Troll derail ahoy.

So anyway, even though I can’t really afford to homeschool my kid (in the sense of staying home with him), looks like I’ll be doing the equivalent by having to tell him his textbooks are full of crap and teaching him what really happened. (and oh, the fun

Maybe when he’s old enough to stay home on his own, I *will* have to pull him out and give him assignments myself, since that might actually be less work, unless, against all odds, more Texans have come to their senses and demanded that their kids actually get educated.

I have some hope there’s time for things to improve, since he’s only 4 and won’t even start kindergarten till next year; unless the school board decides reading and writing are tools of Satan too, he won’t run up against this idiocy for a few years at least.

Comment #122: emjaybee  on  05/19  at  12:25 PM

“You’re arguing for economic anarchy. “

I am not.  I am arguing that a more libertarian government that protects the right of contract and other economic activities without as much limitation of freedom as today would not be all bad.  Economic anarchy seems to be what BlackBloc is arguing for, not me.

Comment #123: anoNY  on  05/19  at  12:27 PM

I do kinda like the synergy of denying both evolution and gravity, though. I’m thinking of that slightly cruel math problem about shooting a monkey that’s falling out of a tree… the wingnut response to that could be a very hearty “MONKEYS NEVER LEFT THE TREES!” and they would have neatly encapsulated their entire understanding of science. So efficient! :D

Comment #124: Bagelsan  on  05/19  at  12:32 PM

“History fail. “

Many bad things happened in the past in all types of economies, but somehow we learn from our mistakes.  Once again, I am not for a return to the situation of 100 years ago.

Comment #125: anoNY  on  05/19  at  12:32 PM

I can handle being called a dumbass, I just like to point out how effective name-calling is as an argument.

It’s so ineffective that you must devote several posts to informing us of such. The argument part of my sentence was everything except the “dumbass”. It’s a shame that you’re so deeply UNaffected by the insult that you couldn’t engage the rest of the sentence.

Fuckwad.

Comment #126: Well, what?  on  05/19  at  12:32 PM

@121: The design of paper bills makes me think that it *wasn’t* deliberately helpful—bills (at least American dollars) seem to be impossible to distinguish by touch.

Comment #127: Bagelsan  on  05/19  at  12:34 PM

I am not for a return to the situation of 100 years ago

And how, pray tell, would that be prevented in your little wonder world?

Comment #128: rowmyboat  on  05/19  at  12:37 PM

somehow we learn from our mistakes.

It’s true! We did! We learned from the mistakes of the Industrial Revolution and as a result, we DISMANTLED THAT SYSTEM. You may not be “for” a return to 1900, but you seem to be too historically ignorant to realize that if you recreate the conditions, you will precipitate a return. Because contrary to what you seem to believe, people have not, in fact, become substantially more intelligent, altruistic, selfless, or given to long-term thinking over the past 100 years.

And thus we come full-circle to the topic of the post. The TX board is ensuring that we have at least one more generation of historically ignorant anoNYs to come. Woo-hoo.

Comment #129: Well, what?  on  05/19  at  12:39 PM

@ Well, what?

““Everyone has interest in their own dignity, []. It’s having interest in the dignity of OTHERS that makes you not suck at life. “ “

What exactly is the argument here, that property owners are not interested in the dignity of others?  That they don’t have to be, and that is wrong?

Comment #130: anoNY  on  05/19  at  12:44 PM

#124

I am arguing that a more libertarian government that protects the right of contract and other economic activities without as much limitation of freedom as today would not be all bad.

This discussion is pointless because you are refusing to actually consider what this would look like (indeed, has already looked like) in the real world. You will keep advocating for your fantasy world, I will keep doing my damndest to prevent your fantasy from becoming a reality.

Comment #131: atheist  on  05/19  at  12:44 PM

“Many bad things happened in the past in all types of economies, but somehow we learn from our mistakes.”

Some of us do.  Libertarians who want to pretend America in the late 1800’s was a paradise?  Not so much…

Comment #132: MikeEss  on  05/19  at  12:45 PM

What exactly is the argument here, that property owners are not interested in the dignity of others?  That they don’t have to be, and that is wrong?

This was a response to your claim that somehow property rights weren’t ever in conflict with individual rights, because property owners care about their own rights.

Property rights may never come into conflict with the individual rights of the person who owns that property, but they can come into conflict with the rights of people who are not the property owner. And the Human rights of other people trump the Property rights of the one, unless you are, you know, not terribly democratic in your thinking.

Comment #133: Well, what?  on  05/19  at  01:01 PM

“but they can come into conflict with the rights of people who are not the property owner.”

And this was what I questioned.  Where does this conflict occur?

Comment #134: anoNY  on  05/19  at  01:06 PM

Where does this conflict occur?

Really? You need this spelled out for you. In a comment thread following a post about THE FUCKING SLAVE TRADE.

You need someone to spell out for you how someone’s (a slaveholder, say) property rights might conflict with someone else’s (a slave’s, say) individual human rights. It is somehow inconceivable to you that an imbalance of power between individuals might lead to the abuse of that imbalance on the part of the more powerful. In which the technically-legal rights of the more powerful nonetheless trample the actual rights of the powerless.

Did you not ever do a connect-the-dots at Denny’s when you were a kid?

Comment #135: Well, what?  on  05/19  at  01:12 PM

“And this was what I questioned.  Where does this conflict occur?”

How about when a huge oil company has a platform in the Gulf of Mexico that blows up and ruins other uses of the Gulf, such as fishing or tourism?  And it’s known that the company could explode the well (on the sea bottom) and stop the leak, but it would permanently seal the current well and would cost them millions to drill another well in replacement.

And so the rights of people who are not the property <strike>owner</strike> leaser are affected…

Comment #136: MikeEss  on  05/19  at  01:14 PM

And this was what I questioned.  Where does this conflict occur?

I own a chemical plant. This plant creates a chemical necessary for the production of gasoline. My plant also poisons a nearby lake, and the toxins are creating birth defects in local children. The locals want my plant shut because they don’t want their children to be deformed. I want my plant to say open because it makes me very rich. Because this is libertarianworld, my economic right to keep my plant open trumps their human right not to be poisoned. After all, their ancestors granted my grandfather the rights to this land in perpetuity and I am not attacking those people and therefore I have an absolute right to my property and to create whatever industry on my land I see fit.

Comment #137: atheist  on  05/19  at  01:16 PM

“You need someone to spell out for you how someone’s (a slaveholder, say) property rights might conflict with someone else’s (a slave’s, say) individual human rights. “

I do not need this spelled out.  I do not believe that someone has property rights in another person. 

I was curious about what *real* property rights impact other people’s rights.

Comment #138: anoNY  on  05/19  at  01:20 PM

“I do not need this spelled out.  I do not believe that someone has property rights in another person.”

...that’s when you manipulate the definition of “person” to suit your desires.  It wasn’t that long ago that even the Irish were not considered fully human, at least to the British…

Comment #139: MikeEss  on  05/19  at  01:23 PM

Well there you go, anoNY, MikeEss just provided you with a “real” example.

Since the fact that the right of one person to own another was clearly considered “real” at a not-too-distant point in history does not suffice. Because clearly, things that actually happened in the past are not real to you. My mistake—you have so amply demonstrated that, time and time again in this thread. Our definition of what constitutes a valid right has never ever changed, and therefore never will be subject to change in the future. Also, bunnies lay eggs!

Comment #140: Well, what?  on  05/19  at  01:26 PM

I don’t even know if I should jump back into the fray since I started this whole derail, but I wanted to clarify my comment above. Libertarians are quick to point out racism when it is perpetrated by the government. So in Reason you will see articles about the AZ laws and the drug war having racist implications. But they offer little to address (and in my experience often don’t even acknowledge) that there are institutional biases that have perpetuated the vast gap between income and wealth that still exists between the races. And if some do recognize this as a problem, libertarianism certainly doesn’t offer any remedy.

Another problem with libertarianism is that it assumes that everyone starts out on an equal playing field, which is simply not the case. If there were not public education system, kids with poor/uneducated/not intellectually gifted parents simply would not get educated. Education wouldn’t magically be doled out to the kids that had the most potential to use their education most efficiently. And this would be the beginning of a permanent class structure. Spending your money to educate your kids is certainly a property right, and I am not sure that equal access to education and the opportunities implied by education may be a human right, and the two certainly seeem to conflict.
And this isn’t even getting into the importance of networking in corporate life.

“the cost of slave labor was just worth $0 or else the slaves would have just gotten better jobs. ” I said that above mainly in jest, but it sort of follows the “I wouldn’t work for scrip” argument really well. The reason that it was against the law for workers to leave the companies was because they were in debt to the company. It was the state protecting property rights.

Comment #141: alysia  on  05/19  at  01:27 PM

And this was what I questioned.  Where does this conflict occur?

anoNY, most of this thread has been about that:

no, because workers were not free to jump companies.  They’d be in debt to the original company for rent or groceries.  Leaving would be against the law. Plus, the new company would be blacklisted by the other neighboring companies and unable to ship their product, buy supplies, etc.

Pollution, refusal to ensure that even the poorest can take advantage of available opportunities, and on and on. Libertarians have through their history been up front about their desire to KILL people who demand better conditions and treatment from property owners. This has always been the case, and the government decided it was unwilling to kill on behalf of libertarian fanatics.

Comment #142: Tyro  on  05/19  at  01:28 PM

Moreover, it is the height of fatuous idiocy to insist that all will be well! For we learn from our mistakes! when the subject of the post is a school board working to ensure that students never even learn that the mistakes happened in the first place, or worse, will learn that they were not mistakes at all, but the crowning achievements of Real America.

I award you no points, and may the flying spaghetti monster have mercy on your soul.

Comment #143: Well, what?  on  05/19  at  01:34 PM

Economic anarchy seems to be what BlackBloc is arguing for, not me.

I am arguing for economic communism, which is one of many different economic systems that have been championned by political anarchists, though all these systems are socialist in nature by definition, since anarchism is a socialism. Mutualism, though, is the inevitable conclusion that an *honest* economic free marketer must arrive to, hence why when I am arguing against libertarians I tend to quote a lot from Kevin Carson. As there’s no point in arguing for communism when it’s already your biggest boogeyman, better to argue against your own conclusions by starting from the same first principles as you.

I would like to mention, though, that private property as the basis of modern economic theory is particularly hilarious in an economy in which the major goods produced (information) are cheaply copiable in a lossless way that doesn’t deprive the original owner of his or her own copy, where the technology for doing such copying will only get more efficient in the future, and where the laws that fence off these property rights are practically unenforceable and will become even less enforceable in the future. Info-anarchy is already upon us. A human being could presently own the entire collected literary works of humanity for less than a year’s salary worth of materials, and this gets cheaper at an exponential scale. Hell, there’s 3 mirors of the Internet archive, where the entire Internet is archived *every day*. 3d printers are only in the first stages of commercial viability, but like all technologies that means widespread (and cheap) adoption by common users is maybe 20 years off, at most. What does capitalism mean in a world where Joe Random User is able to pirate designer shoes and print a pair of the latest Nike creation for a couple dollars (nickels?) right from his desktop PC?

The communists had already predicted the end of scarcity. They were just about a century, century-and-a-half, off.

Comment #144: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  02:14 PM

“I mean, is there any doubt that Megan McArdle, for instance, could be prompted to write apologies for slave owning if she thought there was any social support for it whatsoever?  I can tell you that anonNY would, from his writings here.  Libertarian ideology depends on what is defined as what.  Like I said, libertarians use “private property” as justification for polluting water and air that everyone has to breathe.  Simply defining some classes of people as not-people would make slavery a comfortable fit for libertarianism, which is is of course why there’s quite a bit of overlap between economic libertarians and “states’ rights” folks who are basically apologists for slavery. “

Wow, I just saw this.  I have never heard any libertarian try to redefine the word “person” in order to categorize a group of people as not-people.  You have misread me, Amanda.

Comment #145: anoNY  on  05/19  at  02:28 PM

@143

Once again you are trying to tie me to a law from the 1800s that I already said I don’t find very libertarian.  The working conditions in the 1800s have little to do with what would be demanded today, and I don’t fear returning to them even if the country became a bit more libertarian.

Pollution is a concern, that is true.  All of the examples of oil wells exploding will have to be solved regardless of political system, and I honestly don’t have much of an answer for you besides using tort law to compensate those harmed.  Or maybe regulation is welcome in the event of large potential negative externalities, even to a libertarian.  I think I would lean this way.

Comment #146: anoNY  on  05/19  at  02:37 PM

“The communists had already predicted the end of scarcity. They were just about a century, century-and-a-half, off. “

I honestly hope you are right that the end of scarcity is in sight.  I won’t characterize your arguments as “economic anarchy” again.

Now, when there is no more economic scarcity anymore, would people still have property rights in the stuff they pirate and print at home?  Would “property rights” really be a useless concept when people still have things, and still pay nickels for their copies?

I think it will still be an important concept, property rights.  It will just be a lot less controversial, since everyone will have access to the same stuff (as copies).  Of course, all of this would require free energy, which I would also hope comes about with the end of scarcity (or precipitates it?).

Comment #147: anoNY  on  05/19  at  02:46 PM

#145

I would like to mention, though, that private property as the basis of modern economic theory is particularly hilarious in an economy in which the major goods produced (information) are cheaply copiable in a lossless way that doesn’t deprive the original owner of his or her own copy, where the technology for doing such copying will only get more efficient in the future, and where the laws that fence off these property rights are practically unenforceable and will become even less enforceable in the future.

If “information” is really the main thing our economy produces, then that is less an argument against property rights, than an argument that our economy is worthless crap. The internet is nice, but humans still need land, food, shelter, education, all all those other commodities. Not to mention, the internet runs on servers and backbones which require extremely complex manufacture, and rare metals. In short the “old school” economy isn’t gone, though it may be shifting away from the US.

Comment #148: atheist  on  05/19  at  02:59 PM

that is less an argument against property rights, than an argument that our economy is worthless crap. The internet is nice, but humans still need land, food, shelter, education, all all those other commodities.

Land is a common ressource. A major part of the modern economy is information, which is non scarce. A major part of medieval economy was land, which is scarce but *should* be held in common based on any sane economic principle. If anything, the primary importance of land is itself another point in favor of communism. Or, at the very least, land reform. I mean, the Diggers were already talking about owning the land in common back in the 17th century. It’s not a new fight.

Food and shelter are functions of land. If the first is held in common, these necessarily must be as well. We produce enough food to feed the entire world population already. It is distribution and management (i.e. the neo-colonial usage of Third World land for cash crops) that is at fault. It is likely that as capitalism inevitably fails due to its internal contradictions, and as ecological pressures come to bear on food production, it will become decentralized and shift towards a larger proportion of food being generated in urban areas (by individual citizens or communally owned vertical hydroponics.

http://launch.org/presentations/view/8/large-scale-vertical-hydroponic-ag-system

As for shelter, again urban environments are uniquely well suited for communal housing.

Education is basically information.

As for the rest of the commodities, one might think that technological progress in extracting them is a lot less likely when that progress is driven by capital owners for whom employing socially accepted forms of slave labor is cheap than if communities had to decide commonly on how they should extract those…. with their own livelyhood and health on the line. I trust actual miners more with making enlightened, ecologically sustainable choices than their board of directors.

Comment #149: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  03:38 PM

And if you don’t think fighting against the idiocy of intellectual property rights matter except for saving the Internet, I’d like to remind people that Monsanto is busy patenting all life on Earth.

Comment #150: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  03:39 PM

Blackbloc, OK, maybe. I’ll check out that thing about hydroponic ag, sounds interesting. I still think that the internet/“information society” as some sort of social levelling mechanism has been pretty disappointing so far. Also, information isn’t education… it isn’t even knowledge. Education is hard and takes dedication and most people can’t do it on their own. But, yes, intellectual property rights laws suck and help no-one but corporations.

Comment #151: atheist  on  05/19  at  04:31 PM

I am once again compelled to reiterate that the only people stupider than libertarians are ravers.

Comment #152: felagund  on  05/19  at  04:50 PM

@actor: I don’t think the information economy is a levelling mechanism per say. The point was that the old ways of thinking are obsolete (they were already getting on obsolescence when Karl wrote his Das Kapital, but people could be forgiven back then because the industrial revolution had not yet gone on long enough to arrive at the current, predictable conclusion). If that was enough to make them disappear, the GOP would have lost half of its base when the medievalists disappeared. We wouldn’t still have Tories in Canada or France that long for the old days of the monarchy (and Thailand or Nepal wouldn’t still be directly run by these monarchies).

It’s just that I find a lot of humor in seeing the old ‘fence everything in’ land grabbers think that they can meaningfully land grab in cyberspace. Everyone I know pirates. It used to be you needed to know how to operate a BBS to do that. And it’s just going to get simpler from here. The only thing they can do right now is stop people from commercially releasing tools that make piracy into something as easy as turning on your VCR. I remember when my cousin was the coolest because he had a pirate satellite dish and could get any tv show in the world as long as he could find a transponder and the keys on the signal hadn’t changed since the last time he’d found them online. Now anyone with some technical know-how could make a set-top box that just records any show in HD off BitTorrent that would make cable, sattelite and TiVo obsolete, but the Law of course won’t let anyone put that on the market no matter all the non-infringing uses you could find for such a thing.

Comment #153: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  05:19 PM

And again, before I die it’s very likely everybody will have access to cheap 3d printers that can produce synthetic/plastic objects with fine movable parts and electronic components. The tech is already available for prototyping, it’s only a matter of time before it’s used in small corporations for producing goods on demand (in the same way you can print books on demand now) and from there only a few more years until it’s on your desktop. I don’t know if people will like the material enough to make clothes out of it (it’s possible that fashion will dictate people stick to scarcer materials like leather, silk or cotton for status symbols) but at some point a lot of consumer goods are going to be more or less reproducible at home for an affordable price. If the only thing you can offer to the market is a brand or patented design because your consumers can produce their own shoes at home, then the only thing you have to offer is… information. Which can be pirated. And strangely, most Western corporations’ only assets are just that.

Comment #154: BlackBloc  on  05/19  at  05:28 PM

Pollution is a concern, that is true.  All of the examples of oil wells exploding will have to be solved regardless of political system, and I honestly don’t have much of an answer for you besides using tort law to compensate those harmed.  Or maybe regulation is welcome in the event of large potential negative externalities, even to a libertarian.  I think I would lean this way.
Comment #147: anoNY on 05/19 at 12:37 PM

Any idiot or jerk who can harm more than s/he’s worth points out the inadequacy of tort law as sole source of redress. 

It doesn’t matter how small those externalities are, if the idiot or jerk doesn’t have them, you can either piss up a rope or force her/him to work for you.  AKA slavery.

Comment #155: oldfeminist  on  05/19  at  07:51 PM

Exholt: Sorry to disappoint but if either of us grew up upper-middle class, it was you.  My parents were public high school teachers in an economically depressed and predominately Latino neighborhood. 

Seriously, if teachers have to live with this idiocy the best way to protest is by becoming creative in how they assign material to their students to the extent their school allows them that control.  You can quibble about page length or whatever from my post, but the exercise itself could be used in all levels of middle and high school and even has pedagocial usefulness in teaching students how to use library resources.  Or heck, just show your students some videos about particular events that contradict the text.

It’s a pipe dream to think that the parents will be able to counteract this nonsense—most have neither the time nor the ability to do so.  So my solution is to find ways that teachers can subvert the intent.  Even if it isn’t a blatant “fact-check” assignment, simply assigning one research paper on a topic from their text that uses a few outside sources would likely demonstrate to the students that they have to be skeptical without making fundie parents flip their shit about a teacher “undermining the curriculum.”

Comment #156: history_mom  on  05/19  at  07:52 PM

/me dances into the usual flame war and sez ‘scuse me…

Yo Tyro@72!

Believe it or not, everyone has their hobby horses and everyone got triggers.  I do, you do, and so does exholt.  So long as they ain’t being disruptive, we just nod (or skip to the next post) along.  It’s what I do, at any rate.

Calling out exholt for being his own personality is pretty sucky online etiquette, hey?  Not starting flame wars or attacking other people (unlike you).  Please quit it.

Comment #157: shah8  on  05/19  at  08:08 PM

I know you seem to have a vested interest in deriding people who grew up economically better off than you as especially lazy, but the truth is that while upper middle class American teens do have to be dragged kicking and screaming into writing often and competently, they at least are lucky enough to have someone willing to drag them there.

It isn’t a belief, but my experience from attending and observing classmates at my own undergrad as a scholarship student and a couple of Ivy-level colleges. 

The prevalence of upper/upper-middle class undergrads with writing and other academic deficiencies despite graduating from some of the best private schools in the nation was one reason why I was not only able to graduate undergrad debt free despite the pressing need to find a way to fund what the near-full ride scholarship didn’t cover, but actually graduate with a slight surplus.  smile

Exholt: Sorry to disappoint but if either of us grew up upper-middle class, it was you.

That would only be true if “upper-middle class” included families whose incomes made their kids eligible for free public school lunches, faced the possibility of being tossed out of their apartment in working-class urban neighborhoods because they were struggling to pay rent, and their economic state was such they couldn’t even cover the in-state tuition fees….even with the state covering most of the tuition and the student was commuting from home. 

In any event, the rendition of an upper middle class “Real American” student above was taken from college classmates and family friends who encountered such types of entitled students while teaching at many well-off suburban public schools and some private ones in midwestern, southern, and western states. 

It was a collage of the type of students whose parents would favor policies such as the revamping of Texas history textbooks for their public schools and go off on tirades the moment there is any sign a teacher may not agree their child is “gifted” such as receiving a B, C, or *shudder*...even an F on homework or exams.  Oftentimes, they’d use the PTA board to force the educrats at the school to press the teacher to “reconsider”.  This BS was one of the reasons why most of them are no longer teaching at those schools…or teaching period…..and completely alien to my own K-12 experiences where no parent dared dispute the teacher’s grades unless there was a blatant mistake in the calculation.   

In addition to the unwillingness to acknowledge past historical atrocities and ongoing wrongs and how their group played critical roles in perpetuating them, I think there is also an effort to suppress potential competition for educational and future professional opportunities in the bud against those they don’t consider “Real Americans” in favor of their own kiddies.  Hence, their reasons for suppressing discussions of evolutionary science or eliminating bilingual and multicultural courses for Mexicans and other non-“Real Americans” in the public school system.  Also, reasons why they resent the presence of non-“Real American” and international students in the universities….especially those who are grad students and why their offspring blame any manifestation of their own self-inflicted academic failures on things such as the supposedly inscrutable “foreign accents” of Professors/TAs who look “foreign”.  They look for any opportunity to put-down those who are living proof by their mere presence at those universities that their self-assertions of “Real American” superiority are nothing but pathetic attempts at puffery.

Comment #158: exholt  on  05/19  at  09:16 PM

Believe it or not, everyone has their hobby horses and everyone got triggers.  I do, you do, and so does exholt.  So long as they ain’t being disruptive, we just nod (or skip to the next post) along.  It’s what I do, at any rate.

One of the reasons that I’m a liberal rather than a conservative is because I take moral, personal offense to bullshit. Even if that bullshit is something someone tells him/herself day in and day out to get him/her through the day. It’s fine if that is what it takes, but such things are best kept to oneself unless you want to get called out on your bullshit on a regular basis. Airing it in public as though it were fact just corrupts the public discourse.

Comment #159: Tyro  on  05/19  at  09:27 PM

Look man,

Dude wasn’t even off-topic when you called him out for it.  The bull that you smell, is your own.

Comment #160: shah8  on  05/19  at  09:38 PM

It isn’t a belief, but my experience from attending and observing classmates at my own undergrad as a scholarship student and a couple of Ivy-level colleges.

Well, yes, but when one turns experience into a world-view, that’s either a novel or an autobiography, not a reassurance that ones’ experience is the way of the world.

Well, my experience is a older than yours by perhaps 20 years, but a lot of what you talk about has no relationship to my experiences with my upper-class classmates at the “Harvard of the Midwest”, some of whom were the nicest folks you’d like to meet, others of whom were dipshits that I wouldn’t trust with anything outside of a daily newspaper.

Also, when I worked for a political organization, I knew an upper-class fellow organizer who went to law school and became an advocate for the homeless, and she sometimes talked about “Anglo-Saxon Catholic guilt” being as she was aware that her trust fund and family fortune in general was made in ways that were, shall we say, lived up to the proverb by Balzac about fortunes and crime.

But, on the basis of exholts’ experience, she either didn’t exist or she is such a a rara avis that she should be put in a museum along with living fossils like the platypus or the coelacanth.

In any event, the rendition of an upper middle class “Real American” student above was taken from college classmates and family friends who encountered such types of entitled students while teaching at many well-off suburban public schools and some private ones in midwestern, southern, and western states.

I agree that the standards for students have fallen in general in the past 30 years, but people in a social group tend to see what confirms what they already believe and discard that which goes against their confirmation bias:

Bacon, in the Novum Organum wrote,

  The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (...) draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there be a greater number and weight of instances to be found on the other side, yet these it either neglects or despises, or else by some distinction sets aside or rejects[.][45]


And tyro is right, exholt has a bee in her bonnet about the upper class in this country that buzzes every chance she gets, along with the fact that she let other fools who confused being connoisseurs with using culture as a weapon towards other, i.e., in the service of snobbery, to discourage her from enjoying certain kinds of music.

Comment #161: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  05/19  at  11:33 PM

The education board has dropped references to the slave trade in favour of calling it the more innocuous “Atlantic triangular trade”,

Because, you know, for too long have people ignored the suffering of sugar and tobacco forced to cross the Atlantic.  I’m sure it’s all in a spirit of equality.

Comment #162: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  05/20  at  01:29 AM

I was about to joke that these people must therefore think that USA is the only democracy in the world, and then I realised that they probably do.

Indeed.  I remember speculating online whether “the world’s largest democracy” (the words I used) suffered from having such a high proportion of its population essentially Third World peasants, and having some conservative very very sore at me for disparaging the United States so unfairly.

Apparently, he’d never noticed India.

Comment #163: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  05/20  at  01:42 AM

Apparently, he’d never noticed India.

India?!! Hah!! That mooslim terrist infested country in the mideast in cahoots with the taliban who are hiding in some area known as the Northwest frontier???  Anyways, eeveryone knows that democracy was invented by us “real murikans” in the good ole’ USA.  /snark

Comment #164: exholt  on  05/20  at  04:27 AM

Wait - anoNY? Your Libertarian Fantasy Land wouldn’t have laws against leaving a scrip employer? Meaning that the workers would be taking groceries and housing without paying for them?

Your ideal world wouldn’t have laws against stealing?

Er, I think you are arguing for anarchy.

Comment #165: Rebecca  on  05/20  at  11:08 AM

@121:
It seems to depend on who is in charge when new money is designed.  There is always arguement about it when money is redesigned and I know it was specifically considered when the SBA dollar coin was designed.  This is also not an USAian thing as the Euro coin designs included agruement over this as do those in Japan.  Japan has lots of public accomodation designed to aid the visually impaired.

Comment #166: helen w. h.  on  05/20  at  01:12 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.