Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Alternative Medicine
- Artificial Intelligence
- Atlas Shrugged
- Ayn Rand
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Chess Engines
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Cosmic Heaven
- Designer Babies
- Donald Trump
- Ethical Egoism
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom of Speech
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- High Seas
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Longevity
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Life Extension
- Mars Colonization
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- New Utopia
- Personal Empowerment
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Private Islands
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Resource Based Economy
- Ron Paul
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Teilhard De Charden
- The Singularity
- Tor Browser
- Transhuman News
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Zeitgeist Movement
The Evolutionary Perspective
Category Archives: Libertarianism
Posted: October 16, 2019 at 5:29 pm
Recently, House Democrats announced an impeachment inquiry into President Trump over claims that Mr. Trump held back aid to Ukraine in the hope its leader would investigate Joe Biden. Predictably, social media lit up immediately with #TrumpImpeachment and #ImpeachTrumpNow trending all over the United States. The usual suspects in the #NeverTrump conservative political class joined the deafening chorus of progressive pundits in their long-standing calls for formal articles of impeachment and Mr. Trumps resignation.
Somewhat surprising, however, has been witnessing many prominent libertarians join these ranks in making knee-jerk calls for impeachment. Unfortunately, these political observers dont seem to realize that removing Mr. Trump from office would solve none of the problems associated with his alleged abuses of power. The object of their ire should not be Mr. Trump the man but the office of the presidency and especially the permanent political class and establishment media (hereinafter the establishment) who whitewash and enable true presidential atrocities.
This is nothing new for libertarians. Indeed, the imperial presidency has been a libertarian bugaboo for decades, and many commentators have written eloquently on the dire need to limit the unilateral powers of Americas executive branch. Nearly all presidents since 1900 have expanded the scope of executive power well outside the strictures of Article 2 of the Constitution.
Henry Kissinger once joked, The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer a joke that betrays the brazen callousness with which people in the establishment view supposed legal limits on their actions. Additionally, the last four presidents before Mr. Trump all initiated foreign incursions and clandestine operations that have transformed much of the Middle East into a hellscape. Many of these operations were blatantly illegal e.g. providing direct military aid and comfort to Americas enemies, which is particularly damning since this act fits the exact legal definition of treason.
Speaking of which, Bill Weld recently accused Mr. Trump of committing treason in this Ukrainian fiasco. If this phone call is enough for a treason charge against Mr. Trump, surely there is an open-and-shut case for indicting the entire foreign policy team of the Obama administration including President Obama himself for treasonously providing direct aid and comfort to al Qaeda to overthrow Bashar Assad in Syria. Instead, Mr. Weld heaped praise on Mr. Obamas administration, saying he was statesman-like while ignoring the unspeakable horrors that occurred as a result of Mr. Obamas direct orders.
This flippant attitude has been the long-standing demeanor from much of the establishment toward atrocities that span administrations of both parties. As the Joker says in The Dark Knight, Nobody panics when things go according to plan. Even if the plan is horrifying! Indeed, the establishment press only ever seems to give Mr. Trump slack when he bombs countries unconstitutionally that pesky Congress be damned.
The establishments constant whitewashing of presidential atrocities brings me back to the perplexing reaction among libertarians cheering for Mr. Trumps impeachment. A pillar of modern libertarianism has been opposing never-ending foreign interventions. However, none of the articles of Mr. Trumps impeachment will include, for example, a single word about his support for Saudi Arabias horrific war in Yemen. Instead, the Democrats and #NeverTrump Republicans hell-bent on removing Mr. Trump intend to replace him with someone who wont upset the plan. While Mr. Trumps alleged crimes in the Ukraine fiasco are unacceptable to the establishment, fomenting foreign coups appear to be A-OK. Why should libertarians cheer for Mr. Trumps replacement with someone cut from an interventionist cloth?
Libertarians jumping on the impeachment train seem to be forgetting a basic tenet of economics: There are no solutions only tradeoffs. What, therefore, are the realistic alternatives to Mr. Trump? Legally speaking, after Mr. Trumps removal, Mike Pence would be next, who was an establishment animal before he became Mr. Trumps VP. Thus far, no one has made a compelling case for why a President Pence would be desirable over a President Trump from a pro-liberty perspective.
None of the Democratic candidates with a real shot at winning would be a net improvement over Mr. Trump on either the domestic or foreign policy fronts as Mr. Obama has shown, leftist candidates inevitably abandon their anti-war messages and neuter opposition from a left-wing anti-war movement. These libertarians are committing a Nirvana fallacy in wishing for someone better than Mr. Trump rather than evaluating the actual alternatives.
The establishment plays a key role in expanding the power of the president and should be as much a target of libertarian anger as the president himself. Libertarians must realize that they cannot achieve their laudable goal of reducing presidential power unless the establishment first loses its influence over that power. Replacing Mr. Trump with an establishment sycophant wont advance that goal.
Despite all his shortcomings, Mr. Trump is the best weapon against the establishment given present alternatives; therefore, the liberty movement would be poorly served if libertarians took the bait in this latest impeachment scheme.
Nick Cooper is a Mises Institute research fellow at George Mason University.
Posted: at 5:29 pm
VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) Its an ambitious move: the Peoples Party is running hundreds of candidates in the first federal election since the party formed just over a year ago.
However, despite the fledgling fringe party having hundreds of candidates across the country in every province and territory except Prince Edward Island and Nunavut UBC political scientist Richard Johnston says its unlikely any PPC candidates will win a seat.
Except, perhaps, for the partys leader.
I dont think theyre going to do terribly well. Maxime Bernier probably will hold on to his seat. Beyond that, Im not so sure. I also dont think that on balance, theyre going to be as disruptive a force as some people fear they might be, he says.
Nor will the party be much of a thorn in the side of the Conservative Party, he adds.
The PPC has been hovering at around two per cent support nationally in the weeks leading up to the election. The areas where the party has more support, however, are already Conservative strongholds. Drawing support from that partys base enough to split right-leaning votes is unlikely, Johnston says.
When you look at where theyre hitting their maximums, its basically in Alberta and Saskatchewan, probably the interior of B.C. So these are places where the culture is more Conservative, and where anti-immigrant attitudes tend to be strongest. But theyre also places where the Conservative Party has, generally speaking, very comfortable majorities. And so if they give up a few votes, theyre probably not going to give up any of those seats.
Chad Hudson, a former PPC candidate, recently dropped out of the running in the Nova Scotia riding of West Nova. He says the partys libertarianism and fiscal conservatism values are what initially drew him in, but the racist elements drove him out.
I was assured by the party that a lot of those things that I was concerned about being the more extreme elements of the parties, some of the racist elements, some of the more far right elements werent going to be a problem, that those elements had been purged from the party, he says.
But over time, he says a xenophobic and anti-immigrant sentiment has become prominent.
Johnston says thats the message getting through to the grassroots.
It is generally the case that simpler messages, often involving scapegoating, just tend to have more traction and more penetration, he says. And to the extent that theres going to be voters responding to the Peoples Party, its going to be people who are currently in the Conservative cap, but unhappy with the generally moderate presentation that Andrew Scheer is trying to produce.
In B.C., including Metro Vancouver, where many people are immigrants, Johnston says that message isnt going to go over well.
The people who are potential Conservative voters in the Lower Mainland are often people of color, of immigrant or minority background, and theyre not going to be particularly drawn to a party whose primary appeal is a kind of anti-immigrant, anti-minority sentiment.
While the PPCs chances at securing more than one seat are slim, its populist and anti-immigrant undertones may be more popular than the polls indicate.
A public opinion survey out of Simon Fraser University this summer found a decline in trust in Canadas democracy, and that a populist message may strike a chord with some.
Some of the race-based populism that weve seen emerge in other countries is starting to appear here in Canada. So one-in-three Canadians dont think that foreign-born Canadians should have the same say in government as Canadians that were born here, says Shauna Sylvester with SFU.
The survey also found one-in-four Canadians believe that minorities have too many supports and protections, and that there is too much support for religious freedom.
I think that during election time, certain narratives get exacerbated, and youre seeing anti-immigrant sentiments being expressed by certain political parties, and its important to pay attention to that, she says.
Overall, however, she says she doesnt think these messages will be attractive to most Canadians.
The information of the research indicates that some of the messaging that has come out from parties that are advancing anti-immigration stance or advancing a Canada-first stance will resonate with some portion of the population, Sylvester says. Thankfully, thats a small portion of the population, because I think that those are sentiments that go against a lot of the Canadian values on democracy.
Posted: at 5:29 pm
FRANKFORT, Ky. (WKYT) -- A new poll shows Gov. Matt Bevin and Attorney General Andy Beshear are in a dead heat just weeks ahead of November's gubernatorial election.
A Mason-Dixon Kentucky Poll shows both Bevin and Beshear have 46 percent of the vote. Libertarian John Hicks has one percent while seven percent of voters remain undecided. There is a margin of error of no more than four percentage points.
The polling lines up with a Politico report which said Bevin is gaining ground in the governor's race. He was down eight percent against Beshear in Mason-Dixon's December 2018 poll.
The poll shows Bevin is drawing more Republican support, as he has increased 10 percent in GOP support. He also has a stronger crossover vote with Democrats than Beshear has with Republicans. Bevin's job approval rating remains at 45 percent, while 48 percent disapprove of his job performance.
The polling also points to why Bevin may be using the potential for President Donald Trump's impeachment as a campaign strategy, as only 29 percent of Kentuckians support the President being impeached. Beshear has not said whether he supports the impeachment.
There is also a split between urban and rural voters. Beshear polls better in the Louisville and Lexington metropolitan areas, while Bevin polls better in eastern and western Kentucky. The two are in essentially a dead heat in northern Kentucky, with Bevin polling two percent higher. The Beshear campaign has utilized Rep. Rocky Adkins in its latest campaign advertisement in order to help gain more rural votes. Adkins significantly outperformed Beshear in rural Kentucky counties during the Democratic primary, especially in the eastern portion of the state.
Bevin polls eight percent higher with men, while Beshear polls eight percent higher with women. Bevin has a slight edge among Kentuckians over 50, while Beshear has a significant edge with voters under 50. Beshear polls eight percent higher among independents.
Mason-Dixon polled 625 registered Kentucky voters.
Posted: at 5:29 pm
Today is the birthday of arguably one of the most revolutionary Rock n Roll artists the world has ever known.
On October 9, 1940, John Winston Lennon was born in Liverpool, England. While the legendary Beatles frontman wasnt a libertarian by any stretch of the imagination, there are many themes in his music that we who believe in limited government can empathize with.
Keeping this in mind, here are five songs from the pen of Lennon that libertarians can enjoy.
This song toward the end of The Beatles Era is a true Rock N Roll classic with a socially conscious message. This Chuck Berry style anthem talks about the importance of peaceful, non-violent resistance in the late 1960s a time when the world was on fire due to people tiring of the Vietnam War and the social change that was taking place as a result of the Civil Rights Movement. The song also has a very strong anti-communist theme as Lennon strongly puts down the Communist regime of China, But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, You aint going to make it with anyone anyhow.
This tune out of Johns solo career became an anti-war protesters anthem. It is no secret that Lennon was a very outspoken critic of the war in Vietnam, which stacked up an enormous death toll of 366,010 American casualties, according to TheVietnamWar.info. As libertarians, we advocate for a peaceful, non-interventionist foreign policy which is clearly the theme of this song.
Lennons popular Christmas song was yet another musical jab at Americas hawkish foreign policy. John asks his audience what they have done to better humanity at the end of the year and reminds us all that war can be over if we as a people stand up and declare enough is enough! The song also makes mention to that all men are equal regardless of ethnicity. Equality in the eyes of the law was a key issue that was still being fought for at the time this song was written.
As seekers of truth and transparency between the people and government, this is certainly a song libertarians will love. In the lyrics of this song, Lennon tells our elected officials they can keep the hope and change, and calls them out for continually lying to the people. He takes stabs at the war on drugs and Americas attempts to use our military to police the world. As libertarians, we can surely echo Johns bold declaration that All we want is some truth!
Lennons protest song Power to the People reminds us that the government works for We the People and the only true change will come from us. If we want to restore the balance of power, we must remind our elected officials that they are our employees and we arent their serfs who obey their every decree. This is the reality of the situation and not a politically charged talking point. The only lasting revolution is a revolution of thought.
While anyone who has studied Lennons life knows he was undoubtedly not a free-market capitalist, there is much when it comes to his advocacy for a non-interventionist foreign policy and individualism that libertarians can appreciate. He is recognized by many as being one of the greatest Rock n Roll singer/songwriters of the 20th century, but he was that and so much more. I appreciate Johns contributions to our world, both musically and socially.
Happy Birthday, John! Thanks for the music!
‘Most Americans Don’t Want To Work for the Federal Government’ Says Andrew Yang, Trashing Federal Jobs Guarantee – Reason
Posted: at 5:29 pm
Andrew Yang continues to clear the low bar of being the Democratic presidential candidate most skeptical of government power, if not government spending.
In response to a question about whether he would support a federal jobs guarantee at tonight's Democratic debate, the former entrepreneur argued that the feds were not going to be very good at providing people with meaningful work.
"I am for the spirit of a federal jobs guarantee, but you have to look at how it would materialize in practice. What are the jobs? Who manages you? What if you don't like your job? What if you're not good at your job?" said Yang, distinguishing himself from Sen. Bernie Sanders (IVt.) who had reiterated his support for the idea of a jobs guarantee tonight.
"Most Americans don't want to work for the federal government," Yang bluntly put it, saying a jobs guarantee would replicate the results of failed government retraining programs and produce "jobs that no one wants."
Instead, the presidential candidate made the pitch for his Freedom Dividend, his universal basic income proposal that would provide every American with $1,000 a month.
This, said Yang, would benefit people like his wifecurrently at home raising two children, one of whom is autisticwho are unable to work, and therefore would not benefit from a jobs guarantee.
A universal basic income would "put the money into our hands so we can build a trickle up economy" and "enable us to do the kind of work that we want to do," said Yang.
Some libertarian thinkers have argued for some form of UBI as a more efficient, less paternalistic form of the current welfare state. Yang interestingly makes the pitch for his Freedom Dividend in individualistic, if not necessarily libertarian, terms: A universal basic income allows you to decide how to spend your money, and do what you want with your life.
The math for Yang's Freedom Dividend doesn't quite work out. Skeptical free marketers will note that it has the potential to disincentivize work, and will always rely on coercive taxation.
Nevertheless, in a debate that's mostly been candidates arguing they would be the best philosopher king (or queen), it's nice to hear at least someone on stage to express a little faith in the ability of individuals to run their own lives (even if taxpayers are still paying the bills).
Posted: at 5:29 pm
Voters will decide the next mayor of Indianapolis on Nov. 5. Ahead of that decision, WFYI City Reporter Darian Benson spoke with candidates Democratic incumbent Joe Hogsett, Republican State Sen. Jim Merritt and Libertarian and automation engineer Douglas McNaughton about key election issues.
Libertarian Douglas McNaughton
"Food insecurities can be addressed in two ways and both of them involve the private sector. The first of all, we have an issue in Marion County with the zoning laws, especially in minority and poor income neighborhoods, to get the zoning variances necessary to open something as simple as a grocery store. The other thing we have is companies like Kroger who have addressed this issue in Louisville with pilot programs for mobile grocery stores. We need to get Kroger to introduce that program in Indianapolis as well."
We cant address poverty by ignoring it. We cant address poverty by destroying homeless encampments. We cant outlaw it. We need to have an outreach. Instead of doing what we have done for the past 16 years -- just finding homeless encampments and saying 'well you cant be there, thats a hazard' -- we need to set something up for these people to exist. If that involves the city purchasing property, if that involves more outreach out there to help these people, we need to help them and we need to have that path forward."
"Everybody is looking backwards. The Red Line is a prime example. I was against the Red Line from the very beginning. Open it to competition. We need more private services to get involved. We need to have the ability for people to say, I can do it better. We need to offer them an opportunity to come in and prove that they can do it better."
"One of the things I have heard for 12 years is we need more cops. Police officers dont prevent crime. Police officers catch criminals. Our jail is full, IMPD is really good at catching criminals. Laws dont prevent crime. In fact, laws simply define what a crime is. So, the crime we have, the violent crime, is something outside of the police department. It's outside of laws. We already have laws against it. What we need to do is address the problem head on. This involves both youth outreach, which we have been doing to a point, but studies have been shown that the more money you can put on outreach, the better outcome you have.
The other thing is black market crime. The crime of organization, the crime of prohibition, literally. It's good to note, that after we had this forum and I made this point, they have actually decided to decriminalize, on the local level, small amounts of marijuana possession. And this will, in the longer term, reduce crime because prohibition has been shown, no matter what youre prohibiting, its been shown to be the biggest push for organized crime in this country."
"Currently, the way we fund the infrastructure is kind of odd. It goes by road miles, and not square footage of pavement. We build roads to one standard, and then we maintain them by a completely different standard. So that, cities that have a lot of rural roads get more money for per cost of the road than places like Indianapolis. What impacts roads, always is the commercial traffic. Which is why you see bridges that have weight limits, because they are not built to withstand more than a certain weight. So, the roads that are built heavier obviously take more money to build and yet, the state of Indiana distributes the money equally. That is something the mayor can only address by beating on the door of the legislature and saying you need to change this."
Republican Jim Merritt
"I think that the city of Indianapolis ought to look at a food TIF, a tax incremental financing district, where we can grow the amount of money that we have to incentivize Target, or Aldi or Koger's Ruler brand to come into these different communities. I think the idea of incentivizing bodegas to be on street corners and to be in communities. And, lets just talk about food trucks. You have food trucks serving warm food downtown for the people that work downtown. Lets talk about having semis of food in four or five different places in the city of Indianapolis for sale."
"We need better training for our police officers, we need better equipment for our police officers, and we need better recruitment of our police officers. They need absolutely need support from the mayor. The mayor has to be in the grass roots. Ill have office hours. Ill have mayors night out. We will have data collection meetings. I will know what is going on in the community, and that is a big part of crime prevention itself."
We need a commission like the state of Indiana. Im a state senator and weve had great success with the commission on African American males. Im not sure that we need a commission on African males as much as we need a commission on African American lives. And its very important that we focus on the achievement gap between black and white and as what is happening in IPS Schools."
Im pleased that half of the charter schools in the state of Indiana reside in Indianapolis. And Im also pleased that the mayor of Indianapolis is in charge of them and sponsoring them. I have met with the IPS superintendent, and I asked her to be my partner in governance. And so, my plan is to be right in the middle of the education system in Indianapolis."
Everybody wants a nice street in their neighborhood, and our plan is to completely have a fresh analysis of all streets in Indianapolis. We will share that with the residents of Indianapolis and that openness is incredibly invaluable. And we will also establish a capital asset management plan so theres not the problems weve had the last three winters."
Democrat Joe Hogsett
Weve worked very diligently to improve on and make more readily available what I call the 20th Century model of food access, which is brick and mortar. But when I say 20th Century model, I think its important for all of your listeners to understand and appreciate that there is a 21st Century model that really doesnt involve brick and mortar supermarkets. It really becomes a neighborhood and a community focused issue of better access, more nutrition, higher degrees of awareness and levels of education. In this years 2020 operating budget, we have in that budget a line item that would be distributed to neighborhood and community groups that are working in areas that are food insecure. Find out what their unique issues are as it relates to access and then try to take advantage of that by using city funds to support what neighborhoods and communities are already doing to address the issue themselves."
"We by the end of this year will have added a net increase of 150 police officers in IMPD. Weve been able to return to community-based, beat-oriented policing so that police officers can get out of their car, get to know their neighborhoods and become more involved. We also have increased funding for technology. And then most importantly, in this year the city of Indianapolis will probably spend close to $4 million in crime reduction, crime prevention and crime intervention programs in our neighborhoods to try and stop the gun violence before it actually occurs."
"Well were doing that, I think in very, in many meaningful ways. For example, our summer jobs program that is now four years running, Project Indy. Indy Achieves, a program that has just fully been launched this year, that provides scholarship grants and completion grants. And, those are just two examples of programs that are designed to help our young people throughout Marion County. But, I want to be the kind of mayor who is real and who is present in the community listening to the leadership, listening very carefully to the challenges. And then go back after I have listened and try to craft policies that address those challenges."
"Yeah, I think the best way to keep homeowners in their homes, is to make sure that they can continue to afford owning their home. And so, our neighborhood development strategies have always kept in mind the importance of multigenerational families that have called those neighborhoods their home. When a developer comes to us and asks for city incentives, we ask that developer to minimally, in the development, set a aside a certain percentage of units or homes for below market rate or more affordable housing options for more people so they are not priced out of the neighborhood."
Posted: at 5:29 pm
Its not an uncommon experience to hear Duke students who are politically right-of-center to claim that theyre marginalized on campus and that they face discrimination for their set of beliefs. This perception, you will notice, often manifests as excuses for students to hide their viewpoints in academic or social settings. It is my view that, more often than not, these fears are mired in tales of hyperbole and unrealistic expectations. This isnt to say that Duke is perfect, but rather to encourage intellectual minorities to feel less apprehensive about expressing their views.
Of course, Duke is overwhelmingly left-wing, both in terms of student and faculty, but this is not uncommon at an elite institution. What is important is that, relative to those other schools, Duke does a pretty decent job at permitting and encouraging heterodox opinions, across the board. Anecdotally speaking, Ive never once hid my commitment to free markets in any of my classes, and it would be difficult to convince me that I have been a victim of discrimination for holding these views. Often, professors have been more than happy to entertain my perspectives (and those of my right-leaning friends) and challenge me to defend them to the best of my abilities.
Furthermore, Duke does an above-average job in preserving those conditions necessary to maintain free and civil discourse among young intellectuals looking to engage in political debate. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which provides a rating for schools based on their free speech policies, gave Duke a green light for its speech code, which is the highest possible rating that a school can get, which means that FIRE couldnt find any serious threats to students free speech rights in the policies on that campus. Other campuses are much less fortunate: FIRE claims that fewer than 30 universities out of around 450 have earned a green light.
I am more than willing to concede that there is not nearly enough intellectual diversity at Duke as I would ideally like to see, but that isnt so much a problem with a ready solution as it is a result of those students that decide to apply to schools like Duke. The real issue is, however, that conservative and libertarian students are simply too afraid to voice their opinions, either because they cannot defend their views, or out of fear of some abstract social consequences.
If you are in the former camp, perhaps you shouldnt be a conservative or libertarian. I would ask such students to really think about why they believe what they believe, and hopefully consult the rich tradition of thinkers produced by the political right, so they may be able to formulate a more consistent politics founded in reason, rather than fly-by-night beliefs they picked up from that edgy kid they sat next to in AP Government.
If you are in the latter group, I would urge you to reconsider your stance: most students are far more tolerant of dissenting views than you might think. Ive had some of my most memorable conversations on campus with students with profound opposition to my views on a host of issues, political and otherwise. On the other hand, if your friends are genuinely willing to spite you for your lack of intellectual conformism, you might want to consider expanding your friend circle.
A significant part of the college experience is having your ideas challenged and developing them in an environment dedicated to learning. Instead of feeling like ideological outcasts, conservatives and libertarians should rejoice at the opportunity to whet their views and participate in regular and meaningful contests of ideas, to a degree that many of their left-leaning peers will not. The fact that some students dont experience this facet of university life is more than tragic, and I do hope that right-of-center students can learn to discard their fears, and hopefully stimulate more intellectual discourse as election season rears its head.
Nikhil Sridhar is a Trinity senior. His column "laissez faire et laissez passer" runs on alternate Mondays.
See original here:
The myth of the marginalized conservative - Duke Chronicle
Posted: at 5:29 pm
A new survey finds that more than 80 percent of tech workers say theyll vote. How will they change Seattle?
Margaret O'Mara, whose most recent book is The Code: Silicon Valley and the Remaking of America, mulled this over. Below is an edited transcript.
here is a lot of frustration in the tech industry. At the executive level. theres frustration with a local government that seems to not value the economic upside of the growth of the tech industry.
Skepticism about the ability of government to fix things runs pretty strong in the tech industry. It has really deep roots.
Tech's corporate fathers and grandfathers came of age in the 1970s. This is the Vietnam and Watergate-era generation that turned away from government and had lost trust in government and big bureaucracies.
They were self-consciously building a computer industry that's based on tools of individual empowerment that free you from the bureaucracy. The whole premise of the Internet economy has been to remove gatekeepers and do away with the old institutions that were keeping people from communicating and bring everyone on the same level.
The tech politics of the earlier generation falls into two camps.
One is the techno-libertarian side, which believes the less government has to do with any of what we're doing, the more we're able to innovate and build these amazing companies. Government should just get out of the way.
The other camp says: We build amazing innovative things and we actually can do things better than government can do it. We can fix it. Theres an app for that. The government needs to adopt some of that and learn from us.
In general, engagement in civic affairs and engagement with voting in elections has not been something that the tech industry en mass has done as much as you would think.
A lot of tech workers are young or skew young. They're college-educated. They have graduate degrees.
They're choosing to not only work in the tech industry, but also to live in a city like Seattle. They're attracted to the progressive reputation of Seattle and they tend to agree with more progressive candidates for office a or progressive set of issues.
A new generation of tech workers people in their 20s and early 30s have had very different experiences with tech and also with politics. They are becoming engaged at the local level and the national level to a degree that we haven't seen before.
It's going to be really interesting to see what will happen.
Follow this link:
How will young tech voters change Seattle? - KUOW News and Information
Letter to the Editor: USG Tempe President Hanna Salem puts personal politics over students – The State Press
Posted: at 5:29 pm
Photo by Isabella Castillo | The State Press
"Dear State Press, you've got mail." Illustration published on Friday, March 3, 2017.
Undergraduate Student Government Tempe President Hanna Salem has consistently put her personal politics above her duty to represent all ASU students equally.
Most recently, this behavior was front and center for the National Voter Registration Day event. The annual ASU event is meant as a day to put our political differences aside for the noble cause of getting students involved in the process.
For the last two years, Hanna Salem has turned a time of unity into an event creating division and distrust. Last year, as director of civic engagement, Salem used her capacity to discriminate against the College Libertarians at ASU.
At the 2018 National Voter Registration Day event, the College Libertarians were forced to have their table outside next to a construction zone, isolated from all other political clubs. When the College Libertarians leadership requested to please be moved inside they were told there was no room for them. This event inspired an investigation by Undergraduate Student Government.
Again, the 2019 National Voter Registration Day event was plagued with similar issues. With a new director of civic engagement, political clubs were excited for a new chapter and a successful Registration Day Event. Those hopes were swiftly crushed with decidedly partisan last-minute changes to the event.
Less than a day before the event, it was announced that USG accidentally double-booked the student pavilion and would now be doing the event outside in partnership with NextGen Arizona, a chapter of NextGen America. This came as a blow to all that hoped this would be a non-partisan event for ASU students.
NextGen Americas website states on their homepage, While Donald Trump and the Republican Party deny the climate crisis and drown young people in debt to prop up their wealthy donors and corporate interests were taking action. This by no means comes across as an organization interested in working across the aisle.
This decision left Republican clubs only two options: back out of the event and deny ASU students a right of center option, or be forced to partner with an organization that does not believe in the mission of National Voter Registration Day.
In this time of American politics where we are so divided, we should strive to hold events structured to bring people together. As USGT president, Salem has made no effort to separate her personal politics, going so far as to appear in an Elizabeth Warren for President advertisement.
It is my hope that the Undergraduate Student Government Senate will launch an ethical and complete investigation into President Salems actions this time including a review of how her political biases have tainted her role as President.
The struggle to come together as a nation will continue if we cannot put aside our politics to elegantly come together as a university of students.
Editors note: The opinions presented in this letter to the editor are the authors and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors. This letter to the editor was submitted by Judah Waxelbaum, chairman of the Arizona Federation of College Republicans.
Reach the author at email@example.com.
Want to join the conversation? Send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org. Keep letters under 500 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.
LikeThe State Press on Facebook and follow@statepress on Twitter.
Posted: September 24, 2019 at 5:43 pm
"The Libertarian Party should never again put up national candidates whose views are similar to those of Gary Johnson and Bill Weld."
That was the resolution of a public debate hosted by the Soho Forum in New York City at the SubCulture Theater on September 10, 2019. It featured comedian and podcast host Dave Smith and Nicholas Sarwark, the chairman of the Libertarian National Committee. Soho Forum director Gene Epstein moderated.
Arguing for the affirmative was Dave Smith, whose 2017 comedy specialLibertas was ranked as the number 1 comedy special on iTunes for three weeks. Smith is the host of the popular libertarian podcast Part of the Problem and a co-host of the comedy podcast Legion of Skanks.
Nicholas Sarwark argued for the negative. Sarwark is currently serving his third term as chairman of the Libertarian National Committee, which is the executive body of the Libertarian Party.
It was an Oxford-style debate: The audience votes on the resolution at the beginning and end of the event, and the side that gains the most ground is victorious. Smith won the night by convincing 20 percent of the audience, while Sarwark convinced 16.8 percent.
The Soho Forum, which is sponsored by the Reason Foundation, is a monthly debate series at the SubCulture Theater in Manhattan's East Village.
Produced by John Osterhoudt.
Photo credit: Brett Raney
Subscribe to our YouTube channel.
Like us on Facebook.
Follow us on Twitter.
Subscribe to our podcast at iTunes.
Read the original post:
What Is the Ideal Strategy for the Libertarian Party? A Soho Forum Debate - Reason