Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Radley Balko — Scenes From Militarized America


Pretty extreme. Who is paying for this? And why?

The Huffington Post
Scenes From Militarized America: Johnston, Rhode Island Edition
Radley Balko | Senior Writer and Investigative Reporter

10 comments:

Bob Roddis said...

Too bad Radley Balko is a libertarian and a Hayekian. I guess he must be a racist.

http://www.theagitator.com/2011/04/28/keynes-vs-hayek-round-ii/

Tom Hickey said...

Bob, one of the few things on which we agree is militarization of the domestic security force, especially as the military itself is suggesting that Al Qaeda is essentially defeated and the war of terror is winding down to a police action. As the article points out, the militarization seems to be aimed in practice at the war on pot.

y said...

Hayek was only a little bit bigoted, but definitely one of the better austrians.

Rothbard on the other hand was a bit like a gone-off bag of faeces left out in the rain and pissed on by a bunch of rabid dogs.

y said...

LOL. Not to be taken too seriously Bob, calm down.

He was a total asswipe though

Tom Hickey said...

I can forgive Mises and Hayek somewhat as people of their time. They were hardly exceptions.

Rothbard and Rockwell, not so much. They should have known better.

y said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bob Roddis said...

1. Rothbard was the greatest American of the 20th century. There wasn't a racist bone in his body and it's just typical "progressive'" crap to suggest that either Rothbard, Rockwell or the libertarian movement are "racist". Total bullshit.

2. Considering the tens of millions slaughtered under anti-private property regimes in the 20th century, I'm beginning to suspect that that was the "progressives" intended outcome. Maybe it wasn't a silly mistake.

3. Since it's clear that multi-ethnic democracies with a high amount of "public goods" (aka democratic socialism) tend towards breakdown according to ethnic lines, perhaps western democratic socialists intended for the ethnic strife and slaughter to proceed. Maybe it's not a silly mistake and that is the intent from the start. See:

"Politics in Plural Societies: A Theory of Democratic Instability" by Alvin Rabushka and Kenneth Shepsle. You can buy the book on Amazon:

http://tinyurl.com/afu7byj

OR download it for free (12 mb):

http://www.stanford.edu/~rabushka/politics%20in%20plural%20societies.pdf

Such violent outcomes are impossible and people are safe in a libertarian society because the initiation of violence is prohibited even and especially against the most powerless and hated minorities. Under a "progressive" regime which by definition impairs the protections of private property, all minorities are fair game.

y said...

"Rothbard was the greatest American of the 20th century. There wasn't a racist bone in his body and it's just typical "progressive'" crap to suggest that either Rothbard, Rockwell or the libertarian movement are "racist". Total bullshit"

Laughing my pants off right now, thanks Bob.

BTW I don't think the "libertarian movement" is racist or that you're racist.

"Considering the tens of millions slaughtered under anti-private property regimes in the 20th century, I'm beginning to suspect that that was the "progressives" intended outcome."

Yes Bob, we want to kill all people everywhere.

"Since it's clear that multi-ethnic democracies with a high amount of "public goods" (aka democratic socialism) tend towards breakdown according to ethnic lines, perhaps western democratic socialists intended for the ethnic strife and slaughter to proceed"

Yes, we want the whole world to slaughter as one, one big happy slaughterfest.

"Such violent outcomes are impossible and people are safe in a libertarian society"

Such outcomes are impossible in an imaginary society that exists inside my head, and only inside my head.

"the initiation of violence is prohibited"

Wooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!

"Under a "progressive" regime which by definition impairs the protections of private property, all minorities are fair game."

That's right Bob. Just keep talking to yourself and one day you'll develop multiple personalities that will listen to your mental ravings. Then you'll have another audience outside of MNE! You'll be so happy! Yet still angry all the time! YAY!!!

Joker.

Tom Hickey said...

1. Rothbard was the greatest American of the 20th century. There wasn't a racist bone in his body and it's just typical "progressive'" crap to suggest that either Rothbard, Rockwell or the libertarian movement are "racist". Total bullshit.

Funny how fast Ron Paul backpedaled when confronted with newsletter written in his name, which were apparently ghost written by Rockwell. Ron Paul denied writing them and also knowing who did. It turned into a PR fiasco for him.

Bob Roddis said...

Ron Paul doesn't seem to have it in him to boss people around. That explains the foolish decision to keep the inept and duplicitous Jesse Benton on as his campaign manager. And the newsletters.

Rothbard had this brilliant idea in the early 90s to make an appeal to rednecks. In the 70s, he thought he could partner with antiwar commies. That didn't work out so well either.

So now, since they can't refute him on the merits, the neo-cons call Rothbard a leftist commie and the commies call him a right wing racist. Both are absurd and baseless.

But when all you have is name-calling, I guess you go with name-calling.

Twenty years ago I was an extreme right-wing Republican, a young and lone "Neanderthal" (as the liberals used to call us) who believed, as one friend pungently put it, that "Senator Taft had sold out to the socialists." Today, I am most likely to be called an extreme leftist, since I favor immediate withdrawal from Vietnam, denounce U.S. imperialism, advocate Black Power and have just joined the new Peace and Freedom Party. And yet my basic political views have not changed by a single iota in these two decades!

Rothbard 1968

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard77.html