A new view of eugenics shows its ties to the slavery era – Daily Northwestern

Close

Professor Rana Hogarth gives a talk on her new research in the Hagstrum Room of University Hall on Monday. Her lecture argued that the eugenics movement was motivated by the views of the slavery era.

Jason Beeferman/The Daily Northwestern

Professor Rana Hogarth gives a talk on her new research in the Hagstrum Room of University Hall on Monday. Her lecture argued that the eugenics movement was motivated by the views of the slavery era.

Jason Beeferman/The Daily Northwestern

Jason Beeferman/The Daily Northwestern

Professor Rana Hogarth gives a talk on her new research in the Hagstrum Room of University Hall on Monday. Her lecture argued that the eugenics movement was motivated by the views of the slavery era.

University of Illinois Prof. Rana Hogarth discussed her new research into eugenicist movements in University Hall on Monday. Her talk argued that contrary to common views of American history eugenics is actually a continuation of the views of the slavery era, rather than a seperate movement.

Through her talk, Hogarth presented the idea that eugenics was used to affirm prexisting beliefs that originated in the slavery era.

Eugenic-era race crossing studies owed a lot of their creation to old ideas about race mixing from the era of slavery, Hogarth said. Most people think of eugenics as this forward, new genetic science, which it is, but they were actually taking old ideas and repackaging them with new science.

Hogarths research specifically focused on two early 20th century studies of Charles Davenport, a leader of the eugenics movement in the United States. The two studies examined mixed-race populations in the Caribbean.

The lecture, titled, Legacies of Slavery in the Era of Eugenics: Charles B. Davenports Race-Crossing Studies, was part of the Klopsteg Lecture Series, which aims to present popular understandings of science for the general public.

Hogarth discussed multiple aspects of Davenports experiments, including his reluctance to acknowledge the role of white men in the existence of people identifying as mixed-race in the first place. Davenport, for example, would describe his subjects as fair skinned babies from dark mothers, without ever mentioning the role of a white father.

Davenport attempted to craft a narrative that played into white perceptions about black female sexuality, that only suddenly subtly implicated white men, Hogarth said.

Ken Alder is the founding director of the Science in Human Culture program, which hosts the lecture series. Alder said the talk itself was fabulous.

This particular aspect of (eugenics) was a sort of scientific justification for something that Americans already wanted to do, Alder said.

Raina Bhagat is a first year PhD student in comparative literary studies who attended the lecture. Bhagat said she was especially intrigued by Hogarts discussion of how eugenicists sought to use hair as an indication of ancestry.

It felt like a very contemporary link of this research that centered at the beginning of the 20th century, to here in the 21st century (with) the idea that hair comes in different shapes and sizes, Bhagat said.

Bhagat was referring to a discovery Hogarth made while digging through the archives of the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia.

After asking for all the materials relating to Davenport, she found a tiny manila envelope listed under the category of Family Histories. When Hogarth opened the envelope, to her surprise, human samples of hair fell out.

Though the hair was unexpected, it was definitely fascinating, Hogarth said.

When I went to the archives, I was like, this is really gross, but this is totally going into my research, Hogarth said.

To Hogarth, the human hair samples were more than an unusual find.

To me, seeing something like a human article, a part of somebodys body in this archive tells me that this is about reading peoples bodies, Hogarth said. This is about science, what science can tell us about somebodys potential or about someones ancestry by literally studying something as minute your hair. That to me is very telling.

Email: jasonbeeferman2023@u.northwestern.edu

Related Stories:Brainstorm: Why does Social Darwinism still exist?Satoshi Kanazawa, whose work has been criticized as racist, is facing mounting backlash from the Northwestern community

More:

A new view of eugenics shows its ties to the slavery era - Daily Northwestern

The Dangers In Nationalizing Health Care – Forbes

The history of government in medicine is not a pretty one.

By now it should be clear to everyone that Medicare for All doesnt really mean Medicare for all. In fact, it means getting rid of every health plan Americans know and are comfortable with and creating an entirely new, government-run health care system.

In the Bernie Sanders version, health care would be virtually free. Butgovernment would determine what care you get, when you can get it, where you can get it, and how you can get it.

By controlling physicians salaries, the government could make some services so unprofitable that no doctor would offer them. By controlling technology, the government might make some procedures impossible to obtain.

For example, in the private sector 24/7 access to a physician by phone and email is increasingly a reality for many patients, as are Uber-type house calls. Patients also are increasingly able to get medical consultations in their homes (instead of trips to doctors offices or emergency rooms) by means of a phone or laptop computer. Yet the current Medicare program doesnt allow any of this.

And because of global budgets, patients may experience long waits for care lasting months or even years as they do in Britain and Canada.

Why would the government deny people care? One reason is to save money. Whenever health care is made free, the potential demand for it tends to soar. To hold spending in check, governments control resources in order to keep spending in check. As I have written before, the way governments ration health care is not rational. Its dictated by politics.

But there is also another reason why things go wrong. Nobody cares about you more than you care about you. And that includes the government.

The history of government in medicine is not a pretty one. In the early part of the 20th century, forced sterilization of patients was one of themost popular reforms among political progressives. They believed that in order to protect the gene pool, it was necessary to sterilize all manner of patients including the feeble minded, epileptics, others with mental and physical disabilities and even people with proclivities toward alcoholism, drug abuse, crime and prostitution.

Although this was primarily a progressive movement reform, such conservative politicians as Winston Churchill also advocated it.

One case, Buck v. Bell, went all the way to the Supreme Court. In ruling in favor of sterilization, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes made the memorable statement that "Three generations ofimbecilesare enough." Only one justice dissented.

In all, an estimated 70,000 Americans were forcibly sterilized. The Lynchburg Story is a heart-breaking video with patient interviews that describes the human side of the tragedy. Many Americans associate the eugenics movement with Nazi Germany. If anything, the Nazi eugenics program was imported to Germany from the United States.

In an ironic twist of fate, government today intervenes in the opposite way. In general, Downs Syndrome children are not capable of making rational decisions about sex and procreation. So, to prevent unwanted pregnancies their parents often turn to sterilization. Yet in doing so, they face legal obstacles and many procedures are performed illegally.

But why must government be involved at all?

It wasnt until 1972 that the American news media discovered that for 40 years the United States Public Health Service had been conducting a medical experiment in Tuskegee, Alabama, involving several hundred black males with syphilis. The experiment? It consisted of observation without treatment, including withholding penicillin.

Although the general public didnt know about the exercise for four decades, the medical community as a whole was well aware of it. Through the years, the Tuskegee experiment led to numerous articles in medical journals. After public exposure, many doctors throughout the country came to the experiments defense.

Note: this was a federal government experiment, funded with our tax dollars.

The swine flu fiasco in the mid-1970s is another program some people would probably like to forget. Haunted by the specter of the 1918 flu pandemic, public health officials rushed into a mass vaccination program for an outbreak that never occurred. Gerald Ford even weighed in getting his vaccination in front of the national news media.

Unfortunately, there were dangerous side effects. They included the widespread occurrence of the Guillain-Barre Syndrome, whose progressive paralysis leads to death in 5 percent of the cases.

To get the drug companies to produce the vaccine, the government had to assume liability for all the risks associated with inadequate warnings. But even with that, the swine flu episode led to a major change in liability law. The result: sharp increases in the price of all vaccines and a reduction in their availability.

Governments make mistakes. The people who make those mistakes dont know you or your family. They probablywont shed many tears if the system doesnt work well for you.

Thats reason enough to not create a government monopoly over our health care system.

See original here:

The Dangers In Nationalizing Health Care - Forbes

It Was Never About Overpopulation – Psuvanguard.com

Solutions to climate change dont exist in a vacuum. Ideas have real world history, context and impact. Multiple speakers held a public talk at PSU to discuss how climate change intersects with issues of reproductive justice.

The first PSU Black History Month Lecture, hosted by the women, gender and sexuality studies department took place Feb. 5 at Smith Memorial Student Union. According to Lisa Weasel, chair of the WGSS department, PSU has recently experienced the loss of a significant number of Black faculty and staff, which is detrimental to student success and erodes the educational mission of our university. This lecture honors the valuable work of Black scholars, especially Black feminist scholars, to our department and community.

The guest speaker of the lecture was Dr. Jade Sasser. Sasser is an associate professor of gender and sexuality studies and a member of the core faculty of the sustainability studies major at the University of California at Riverside. The WGSS department hopes to make the Black History Month Lecture an annual event.

The lecture was titled, Can we have Reproductive Justice in a Climate Crisis? This was also the question Sasser asked at the beginning of her lecture. For a long time, the question of overpopulation contributing to climate change has been a very debated subject among scientists and reproductive justice advocates.

Overpopulation is just one of the many intersections between reproductive justice and climate change. In her book On Infertile Ground: Population Control and Womens Rights in the Era of Climate Change, Sasser explains how population control as a solution to environmental issues is not, and never was, the answer to solving the climate change crisis.

According to Sasser, climate crisis narratives are based on changing reproductive rights. This is reductive logic to Sasser. Ever since the argument of overpopulation causing climate change has been made, the destruction of female bodies through reproductive justice has seen an astounding increase. Efforts to sterilize women especially among poor communities and women of color have been seen time and time again in medical historiesor as Sasser said, herstories.

Women of color with a low income have been targeted for sterilization because of their inability to take care of their children and reliance on welfare. Sasser brought up the example of John Labruzzo, former member of the Louisiana House of Representatives, who infamously suggested paying women on welfare to voluntarily sterilize in 2008.

In addition to political efforts being made to sterilize women, many medical institutions have considered sterilization to be academic training and have encouraged the practice for many years. Most of these sterilization procedures were conducted without the consent of the patient.

The climate crisis has also been put into a framework of a world war against the people, contributing to the push for population engineering. The term population engineering was coined by bioethicists at Georgetown in 2016 in an article published in Social Theory and Practice. Sasser equates population engineering to eugenics, which is when reproduction of individuals is selectively limited to produce better humans. Eugenics is a concept deeply intertwined with histories of racism and oppression.

The example that Sasser mentioned in her lecture was giving tax breaks to people without children vs. having higher fees in hospitals for giving birth. Eugenics is seen even in institutions that are supposed to be advocating for reproductive rights. For example, Sasser mentions the organization of Planned Parenthood has contributed to eugenics, such as sterilization and past reports of pushing for the use of cheap birth control.

Although reproductive justice advocacy has had a complicated past, there are some efforts being made to help regulate the misconceptions of overpopulation. For example, a collective by the name of Sister Song has made significant improvements for the reproductive rights of low-income women of color. Their aim is to advocate for the choice of the woman: either to have children or to not have children; and if there are children to raise, to make sure that the parents involved have enough support and resources to do so.

The main point of Sassers lecture was to critique the idea of overpopulation in relation to reproductive choices. The bottom line is the idea of overpopulation contributing to climate change is destructive to womens bodies. Sasser emphasized that climate change is a living phenomenon and is centered around human bodies and how we are related to and have a direct impact on our surroundings.

Sasser urged the audience to reject the notion of overpopulation and instead focus on our individual behaviors and choices as it relates to the environment. We can collectively make a difference in the climate change crisis, because after all, there is strength in numbers.

Here is the original post:

It Was Never About Overpopulation - Psuvanguard.com

In Chicago, Legal Pot Could be Just the Beginning. Are Mushrooms Next? – WTTW News

Chicago could become the largest city in the nation to decriminalize natural psychedelics like mushrooms and peyote.

A little over a month after Chicago made recreational marijuana legal, the City Council is considering whether to decriminalize what are termed entheogenic plants that contain psychoactive substances that can induce a spiritual experience.

Denver decriminalized psychadelic mushrooms in May and Oakland followed suit in June. Last month, Santa Cruz voted unanimously to decriminalize all entheogenic plants.

Among the proponents of such a move in Chicago is Ald. Brian Hopkins (2nd Ward) who introduced a resolution in October to have the Chicago Department of Public Health explore the potential benefits of such substances for treating a range of illnesses, from post-traumatic stress disorder to drug addiction.

The resolution recommends that law enforcement reduce the pursuit of criminal cases involving organic psychedelics to amongst the lowest priority.

In a statement, Hopkins said hed like to encourage a public discussion to explore the use of such substances for the treatment of a range of ailments, from PTSD to chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) to anxiety and depression.

Used for ceremonial and healing purposes for thousands of years by cultures around the world, the science is showing tremendous potential for healing ailments of the mind, said Hopkins.

Entheogens have also shown promise in the treatment of substance abuse and addiction, and even as a smoking-cessation tool.

Psychedelic mushrooms growing in Veracruz, Mexico. (Alan Rockefeller / Wikimedia Commons)

Richard Miller, professor of pharmacology and psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Northwestern Medicines Feinberg School of Medicine, says that its important to recognize that the period of prohibition since 1970 is highly unusual.

People have taken these things for thousands and thousands of years, said Miller. What happened was they became associated with the counterculture movement of the 1960s which was a very, very powerful counterculture much more powerful than the kinds of things we have these days. And it was very frightening to middle-class America and the Nixon government decided it had to go away, so they passed a law in 1970 called the Controlled Substances Act which made all these things illegal.

Prior to that, Miller says, thousands of medical papers had been written which seemed to suggest some very, very promising medical uses for the plants. But after passage of the Controlled Substances Act, all of that research was effectively shut down.

Thats the abnormal time, the time we have just been living through, said Miller. So really, if you decriminalize these things you are really getting back to what for thousands of years has been normal. Now theres a renaissance in interest in these things again either with respect to individual spirituality or with respect to medicine.

Last year, the Food and Drug Administration designated psilocybin a breakthrough therapy for treating major depression in a move designed to accelerate drug development. The FDA said that preliminary evidence seemed to indicate that it may be a substantial improvement over currently available therapies.

These drugs can really shake up your psyche a lot and make you look at things in a completely different way, said Miller, who notes that modern research tools and techniques mean that we now have a far greater understanding of what these substances are doing to the brain.

For example, brain scans have revealed that psilocybin the active ingredient in psychedelic mushrooms seems to increase brain connectivity.

What you can say is that when you take something like psilocybin what you see is that the different parts of the brain become much more connected with each other than they were before, said Miller. Now what exactly that has to do with spirituality is a very interesting question at the cutting edge of research at the moment.

According to Miller, the classification of these substances as Schedule 1 drugs the same designation given to heroin was always nonsense.

The whole drug categorization thing was a completely political thing. It had absolutely nothing to do with what the drugs were or werent good for, said Miller. Some of them are dangerous and some of them really arent. It was a completely political thing. Its actually got nothing to do with what the drugs do at all.

Visit link:

In Chicago, Legal Pot Could be Just the Beginning. Are Mushrooms Next? - WTTW News

The Joys of Growing Older – Cannabis Now

I never thought Id be so happy to turn 65. Finally, this year on Feb. 1, the big day has come and while I feel basically the same as I did on Jan. 31, something is noticeably different. Not only do I receive Medicare at last, but I have entered the next stage of life, along with millions of other baby boomers. OK Boomer may be the response, but remember, getting older will happen to all of us and should be considered.

Believe it or not, growing older affords a certain amount of righteous entitlement and freedom. Althoughthey sayat least 29% of boomers ages 65 to 72 are still working or looking for work, Im talking about the liberated head space that comes with aging. Clearly, I am in the 29% of working seniors, but its just not the same as when I was 30 and working at a daily newspaper. Yes, I still have deadlines looming constantly, but along with age comes the grace to accept them without as much stress and competition.

Same goes for politics. Yes, the world is crazy right now and doesnt seem to be getting better. Between climate change and corrupt politicians, it seems pretty darn horrendous. Yet I am always reminded of something my father drove into my head when I was a teenager: History repeats itself. I refused to believe him back then, when I was a full blownoptimistic flower child, but now that I have actually seen history unfold before my eyes, I get it. As we learn from our mistakes, it doesnt seem as daunting. Its all about human nature doing its thing.

Of course, I have no doubt that a lifetime of cannabis consumption has helped me to realize these conclusions. Questioning authority and raising my consciousness have been my dear friends, the best techniques to understanding this bizarre human nature that comprises humans. We are what we eat and we are what we smoke. Cannabis has inspired me to both go with the flow and lead the parade, to sit back and watch the show while also being a central character. And with age, comes the revelation that it is all exactly as it is meant to be.

So what if I am working harder than ever in my life at 65, running a cannabis business? It is an opportunity to learn, to meet fantastic new people all the time, and to share knowledge gleaned over my six and a half decades. So what if I have now beendiagnosed with moderate COPD, had a hip replacement and some heart issues? Every machine wears down eventually, but the lessons learned from all of those conditions can be used to help teach and guide others on their path. Even the worst most foreboding situations can be seen as gifts from the universe.

Every morning as I awake I recite my six goals for the day: to practice unconditional love and compassion, honesty and humility, discipline and devotion. Then I remind myself of the three little words taught to me by our teacher in India many years ago: Have no doubt. Thats a big one. It is the core essence of finding peace in ones life to accept that whatever happens has a valid reason and an outcome of exactly what is supposed to transpire next. The ugly duckling will turn into a swan every time if you let it be itself. Again, go with the flow.

Granted, I do not smoke as much cannabis or take as many psychedelic journeys as I did as a young woman. But as one ages, the need is not necessarily there. So many imprints have been made already, so much guidance has been granted by the sacred herbs, that I feel fortunate to have found them early in my life. My experiences with entheogens has no doubt brought me closer to the understanding of the divine and raised my levels of compassion. They have helped me accept any fears of death and the next great chapter. Funny, they used to talk about acid and marijuana flashbacks when I was a kid and I laughed. But now I see how actually beneficial it is to be able to tune back into those other levels of reality at any time. To feel the godliness in me and everything around me, including animals and plants.

I also find that as I grow into my senior-hood I recognize how different, and the same, I am from my parents. I watched my parents mellow with age, and I imagine I am doing the same. I did my dropping out several times in my lifetime and I dont regret a bit of that. Yet, I also see the effects of being a flower child in my youth, who has blossomed now into a full-grown plant full of fruits and flowers. Every plant needs a steady watering to become fully ripe and I have certainly never shied away from growing experiences. If now, at 65, I still need to work to keep this plant blooming, so be it. Every day is a fresh experience, be it on the road going overland to India as I did so many years ago, or here on the ranch as I help guide our business to fruition. It is all part of my complicated karma.

While I cannot prescribe my lifestyle for all, or the cannabis consumption contained therein, it certainly has worked for me and many others of my baby boomer generation. Imagine if all those babies turned into conservative grumps? Thanks to the 60s and the hippie revolution, we have a balanced population to keep things interesting. Whether you find your peaceful place via meditation, cannabis, psychedelics or doing service for others or a combination of all of these things your higher consciousness will be an uplifting force for our otherwise confused world. I suggest you be not afraid of aging, because besides the great benefits of Medicare, there is the calm peace of mind that will take you under its wings if you let it. Embrace it its all going with the flow of life.

TELL US, does cannabis help you go with the flow?

Continue reading here:

The Joys of Growing Older - Cannabis Now

Low voter turnout at the Iowa Libertarian Party Caucus – Oskaloosa Herald

OSKALOOSA The lack of attention from the media and the public eye didnt stop the Libertarian Party of Iowa from holding their first-ever Libertarian Presidential Caucus.

With only one caucus-goer present, aside from three county party officials, they all convened on the third floor of the Oskaloosa Library Feb. 8 to elect county officers and select their preferred presidential candidate. Currently there are 20 Libertarians in the running for President of the United States. Receiving two votes, Future of Freedom Foundation Founder Jacob Hornberger was chosen as the preferred candidate in Mahaska County, followed by Lincoln Chaffee and write-in Marco Battaglia with one vote each.

Having almost half the votes from the 22 counties that participated, official results from the Libertarian Party of Iowa show Hornberger was the clear and obvious winner for the state as well with 134 votes.

Hornberger had a total of 134 votes, leaving the other 19 candidates far behind. U.S. Senator Lincoln Chaffee came in 2nd with 36 votes (12.77%), 1996 Libertarian Vice Presidential Nominee Jo Jorgensen with 18 votes (6.38%), followed closely behind Veterans Against the Iraq War Founder Adam Kokesh with 17 votes (6.03%) and software engineer and entrepreneur Daniel Behrman with 14 votes (4.96%).

While the caucus turnout was extremely low, Mahaska County resident Ralph Beck, a member of the Libertarian Party since 1993, said he is excited to finally be able to attend a caucus for his political party.

I have been waiting for this for a long time, he said. It feels great, I think its wonderful that we have finally got enough recognition and got ourselves together enough. I think the Libertarian message really needs to get out.

That message being less government and more freedom, he said. Mahaska County Libertarian Party Chair Brandon Molyneux said the party is still a young party in the state that is still trying to get the message out. During the caucus, Molyneux vocalized his support for Jacob Hornberger as he feels Hornberger is the person to carry the parties message forward.

He is definitely a principle libertarian and would be able to carry our message on a national level, he said. You dont hear a lot of candidates from any party mention the words, liberty or freedom. For me, it goes back to principles. The principles of liberty and I think hes the best person to carry that message.

The partys caucus began with the group electing and nominating county officers. Molyneux will remain chair in Mahaska Co., Abigail Van Voltenburg will remain co-chair, and the Secretary will remain Charles Lucas.

Molyneux said he chose to be a Libertarian because Democrats and Republicans didnt represent the things that were most important to him well. Although he would have preferred a bigger voter turnout Saturday, Molyneux said he is happy with the turnout that they received as the party is still new and establishing its presence here.

Im happy with the turnout; of course, Id like it to be bigger, Molyneux said. Id love to have a full room but we are a young party here, some counties dont even have an affiliate. Were a very young party in the grand scheme of things, so I think were off to a good start.

The Iowa Libertarian Party obtained its official political party status in Iowa in 2017, the party was established in Mahaska County in 2018.

Tiffany McDaniel can be reached by phone at (641) 6609659, by email at tmcdaniel@oskyherald.com or on Twitter @tmcdaniel_osky.

Tiffany McDaniel can be reached by phone at (641) 6609659, by email at tmcdaniel@oskyherald.com or on Twitter @tmcdaniel_osky.

View original post here:

Low voter turnout at the Iowa Libertarian Party Caucus - Oskaloosa Herald

Early voting starts Thursday – Winston-Salem Journal

Early voting for the March 3 primary starts Thursdayin Forsyth County, with a new look for voters as most make their first use of new voting machines.

Voting starts at 8 a.m. at 11 locations around the county, including the main elections office in downtown Winston-Salem.

Offices from U.S. president to Forsyth County commissioner will be on the ballot, as well as a proposal to impose a quarter-cent sales tax meant to boost teacher pay.

Voting takes place from 8 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. on weekdays through Feb. 28.

Saturday voting will take place on Feb. 22 and Feb. 29, but not this Saturday, said Tim Tsujii, the county elections director. When Saturday voting occurs, voting will be from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m.

Tsujii said Wednesday that the county's new voting machines are ready to go.

"All the machines for early voting have been tested, and we are in the process of delivering them to all the sites," Tsujii said.

Members of the Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, Constitution and Green parties all have primaries. Unaffiliated voters can choose to vote in the Democratic, Republican or Libertarian parties, as those parties have opened up their primaries to unaffiliated voters.

The Constitution and Green parties have closed primaries, meaning only members of the party can vote in the primary.

An unaffiliated voter who doesn't want to vote in a party primary can ask for the nonpartisan ballot. The only contest on that ballot is the one on the quarter-cent sales tax increase.

As of Feb. 3, the county had 256,213 registered voters. There were 101,411 Democrats, 73,328 Republicans and 1,391 Libertarians. The Constitution Party had 109 members here and the Green Party had 86 members.

The deadline to vote in the March 3 primary passed on Feb. 7, but people who are not registered but otherwise eligible can both register and vote during the early-voting period.

For the 2020 election cycle, and for years to come, Forsyth County voters will be using machine-counted paper ballots in both early voting and election-day voting.

That's a change-up from the recent past, which saw touch-screen voting in early voting, followed by paper ballots for election-day voters.

New rules require all counties to have voting systems that rely on paper ballots. Voters mark their choices by filling in ovals on the paper ballot. No write-in votes are allowed in a primary election, Tsujii said.

People with disabilities can request use of a touch-screen voting machine that will be available at each polling place, but even that produces a paper ballot that can then be counted by machine. The touch-screen machine can even read out names to those who need that.

Tsujii said the tabulators that voters put their ballots in for counting have the ability to detect mismarked ballots or ones that are marked for more candidates than the voter is supposed to select.

But the machines won't pick up on someone not voting at all on some contest, since some voters pick and choose which races they want to vote in.

Voters living in any precinct can vote at any of the early-voting sites.

*Forsyth County Board of Elections, 201 N. Chestnut St. in the Forsyth County Government Center.

*Brown & Douglas Community Center, 4725 Indiana Ave., Winston-Salem.

*Clemmons Branch Library, 3554 Clemmons Road, Clemmons.

*Kernersville Branch Library (Paddison Memorial Branch Library), 248 Harmon Lane, Kernersville.

*Lewisville Branch Library, 6490 Shallowford Road, Lewisville.

*Mazie Woodruff Center, 4905 Lansing Drive, Winston-Salem.

*Old Town Recreation Center, 4550 Shattalon Drive, Winston-Salem.

*Polo Park Recreation Center, 1850 Polo Road, Winston-Salem.

*Rural Hall Branch Library, 7125 Broad St., Rural Hall.

*Southside Branch Library, 3185 Buchanan St., Winston-Salem.

*Winston-Salem State University Anderson Center, 1545 Reynolds Park Road, Winston-Salem.

Read the original:

Early voting starts Thursday - Winston-Salem Journal

Gary Johnson offers help to Gabbard campaign amid 3rd party talk – Business Insider – Business Insider

KEENE, N.H. Former New Mexico governor and 2016 Libertarian Party presidential nominee Gary Johnson offered his support to Democratic presidential hopeful Tulsi Gabbard ahead of Tuesday's New Hampshire Primary in a voicemail obtained by Insider.

"Hey, I was asked a long time ago to endorse Tulsi, and I did, and you know, whatever I can do I'm not active on social media but I did endorse her, and you know, whatever quote you wanna attribute to me to say vote for her, you got it," Johnson told a local Gabbard volunteer.

"Anyway, talk to you later," he continued.

Gabbbard, a 38-year-old Congresswoman from Hawaii, has set herself apart in American politics through her willingness to buck her own party.

During the 2016 election, she resigned from a post with the Democratic National Committee to endorse Bernie Sanders and allege the DNC was hindering his campaign in favor of Hillary Clinton. Most recently, she voted "present" on both articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump in the House, the only representative to do so in either party.

While Gabbard has denied mulling a potential third party run in the past often insisting she will remain in the Democratic primary "through the convention" she told a voter in Greenland, N.H. today that she would be receptive to a third party in general, according to Michael Shure of i24 News. She later clarified to BuzzFeed's Rosie Gray, "I am not running as a third party candidate."

Although no candidate in either major party has won the New Hampshire primary by winning among independent voters without a plurality of support in their own party, Gabbard has drawn a significant proportion of supporters to her events who self-identify as Republicans, 2016 Trump voters and non-Democrats, particularly libertarians.

Here is the original post:

Gary Johnson offers help to Gabbard campaign amid 3rd party talk - Business Insider - Business Insider

Why Bill Weld Is Really Running Against Trump – The Atlantic

On Thursday, tucked inside a basement college classroom in Durham, New Hampshire, that could have doubled as a bunker, Weld described the stakes of his campaign. His expectations were the floor, he told me, leaning back and opening a bag of popcorn. If he got even a semblance of support, it meant that Republicansand independents, who are able to vote in the states primarywere receptive to someone other than Trump. If Trumps command of the Republican Party is complete, Weld at least hopes to be the firewall preventing Trumpism from spreading beyond the GOP.

Read: Breakfast with Bill Weld

Ive always been on the libertarian edge of the Republican Party, he said. But I certainly dont feel a member of this party as its represented in Washington, D.C., right now. There should be no illusions as to whether Weld will win the nomination. (He almost certainly wont.) The president boasts a 94 percent approval rating among Republicans, according to the latest Gallup poll. But being an underdog has its benefits. Theres nothing for me to be fearful about, Weld said.

Among independents, Trump has a 42 percent approval rating. Weld believes that he can persuade those independents to stick with him in several of the open primariesand semi-open primaries, such as New Hampshireswith what he calls the whole truth about Trump: that the president is an outrageous racist who is unqualified for office. While Pat Buchananesque finishes are out of reachthe political pundit won 37 percent of the New Hampshireprimary vote in 1992 against the incumbent, George H. W. Bushan insurgent influence campaign may not be.

Never Trumpism might be more of a capillary than a vein, Weld believes, but its a vital one. People ask me, you know, Why are you in this? he said.I mean, my goodness, were looking at a president who thinks that he doesnt have to listen to anybody and hes unwilling to read anything. He added, Thats dangerous for the United States.

Thirty minutes before Weld and I spoke, he was upstairs sitting in an audience, searching for a microphone to offer more of a comment than a question to Deval Patrick, also a former governor of Massachusetts, who was speaking at a forum on higher education. Weld had called Patrick the day after Patrick announced his run for the presidency to let him know that he admired what he was doing. Then, together, they lauded another former Massachusetts governor for his vote to impeach the president. We can welcome Governor [Mitt] Romney to the good guys club this time, Weld joked. (Patrick dropped out of the race this morning after failing to gain traction in Iowa and New Hampshire.)

I asked Weld what it would mean if hes actually able to sway some Republican voters. It means that there is an appetite for an alternative to Trump, he said. Then, I asked, what if hes not successful? Well, he said, it means that Republicans are not willing to listen to someone whos pointing out that Emperor Trump doesnt have a nice new fancy set of clothes on.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

Original post:

Why Bill Weld Is Really Running Against Trump - The Atlantic

How to Make the Most of New Gambling Legislation – The Libertarian Republic

Online gambling has been prohibited in most states for a number of years now, but things are slowly starting to change. After new legislation in the supreme court, states are now being allowed to choose their own online gambling laws. Many are starting to open up possibilities for both customers and businesses. If youve seen how the gambling industry has grown in countries like the UK, youll have seen how much money there is to be made. But what does this mean for you, as a consumer in a newly legalized gambling state? Maybe you dont live near a casino and have never had the opportunity to put a sports bet on. If thats the case, then youre in the right place. In this article, were going to look at a few ways you can make the most of online gambling if you dont know much about it.

One of the best things about online gambling for customers is how easy it is to place a bet. Its so much more convenient than having to make a trip to the casino or other betting premises. Thats because you can access online betting sites with any internet enabled device. So you can place a bet when youre on the move with your smart phone or tablet device. You can also actually place bets when youre at a live sporting event or venue. With sites like Nairabet you can access them easily and place bets no matter where you are.

Another key benefit to users is the ability to enjoy bonuses and other incentives. The online gambling industry is highly competitive. That means each company needs to use powerful marketing ploys to try and get people to sign up to them rather than the competition. This brings huge benefits for the customer, who can enjoy massive multiples of their deposit in bonus funds. Sometimes, you dont even need to deposit. Thats called a no-deposit bonus, and while not normally as much as a deposit bonus, can still give you money to play with without risking your own funds.

While traditional casinos do offer a form of incentiveby comping meals and rooms, this is never as direct or clear for the consumer.

If you win, its actually much easier to get your money with online betting companies. Some sites actually pay out in hours and you can use online wallets such as PayPal or all major credit cards.

The problem with many traditional bookmakers is that they dont really allow you to bet on a vast range of different sports. Thats simply not the case with online betting, the right sites cover hundreds of different events and a ton of different sports. Youll also be able to bet on all sorts of markets which might not be available in traditional bookies.

Because online sites are always trying to compete with a vast array of different ventures, you can get the best offers as well as the most competitive odds. A bricks and mortar bookmakers might be the only site in town where you can bet, and casinos can also have captive audience. With online gambling, the consumer has the best chance of finding the best odds in the industry and they can use oddschecking sites to help with this.

There are a few reasons why many people prefer to stick with what they know, but if you havent tried online betting before and are a fan of gambling, you really have been missing out.

Originally posted here:

How to Make the Most of New Gambling Legislation - The Libertarian Republic

Why I decided to leave the Republican Party – Alaska Landmine

Ive always been a Republican. I grew up in a very conservative Catholic family. From childhood until I left for college, we lived in Rancho Santa Fe, a well-known Republican stronghold of Southern California. My parents reside there to this day. My undergraduate studies were in economics and government at reputationally conservative Claremont McKenna College.

Most of the candidates Ive voted for or donated to over the years have been Republican. I have hosted meetings for my District (28) Republican Committee at my home in South Anchorage. My politics were part of my identity and I intended to one day seek elected office as a Republican. Along the way, I met, collaborated with, and befriended wonderful people on all ends of the political spectrum.

Regardless of ones background, a quality shared by humans is the ability to blend cognitive, experiential learning with instinct. It enables us to read a situation and, if necessary, take appropriate, decisive action. In other words, the famous axiom: when the time is right, youll know. Anyone reading these words can pinpoint illuminating moments in their life when they simply knew it was time; time to leave a relationship that was beyond repair, time to leave a job that wasnt working out; insert your own experience when, like the proverbial light bulb turning on in your head, you knew it was time to move on.

Advertisement. For information about purchasing ads, please click here.

For me, such a watershed moment came on February 5, 2020. I knew it was time to leave the Republican Party. I registered as a member of the Alaska Libertarian Party.

Part of getting older is coming to terms with realities that shift ones paradigm. Throughout my two decades of adulthood, Ive witnessed a material and tragic shift in the Republican Party, rapidly accelerated in recent years by President Trump. Undoubtedly, the Republican Party now prioritizes a socially conservative agenda, which grows increasingly obsolete with the passage of time. In its pursuit, the Party has irreparably alienated a critical mass of Gen-Xers, Millennials, and Gen-Zs.

Ignored by the Party is fiscal conservatism and, at times, basic decency. Last September, I published an article in Must Read Alaska documenting this shift from my perspective, and holding President Trump accountable for (1) his rapid expansion of Federal debt at a rate now exceeding its ascent under President Obama, (2) the denigration to the Republican brand that his words and actions have brought about, and (3) his fiscally liberal policies and interference with free markets. If you need a good laugh, peruse the comments that follow.

Despite our presidents rhetoric denouncing socialism, socialism is, indeed, a likely result when sovereign debt reaches the kind of unsustainable levels America now owes. World history demonstrates such causality through multiple examples. Just days ago, our president reaffirmed his liberal fiscal policies through a State of the Union address celebrating his administrations spending and growth of the federal government, all to the applause of the Republican Congress. Further, the newest budget posited by President Trump this week continues deficits for years to come, accruing trillions more to our debt.

Republican leaders also empower our presidents lack of civility, respect, and honesty. For years now, Ive watched as Party leaders condoned, and at times celebrated, the vile, often grammatically and factually inaccurate statements made daily by our president. Many shrug it off with the casual refrain Ive heard countless times in Republican circles: I wish he would just stop using Twitter This response is insufficient.

As if to confirm my decision, I listened to our Presidents press conference celebrating his impeachment acquittal, using the terms sick, evil people to describe his political adversaries. Dont get me wrong, Democratic leaders embarrassed themselves in this impeachment spectacle, but sick, evil people are terms we once assigned to terrorists like Dylann Roof or Osama Bin Laden. Now, this rhetoric is for people with whom we simply disagree.

Like I said. When the time is right, youll know.

Advertisement. For information about purchasing ads, please click here.

Im also not blind to a similar chasm within the Democratic Party between the more moderate, blue dog types, and the woke, progressive left that seeks a socialist and socially engineered America. Becoming increasingly disenfranchised are those lost among the reasonable middle ground. The moderate and independent voters, who lack a voice in the primary system (which in many jurisdictions is closed), end up stuck choosing between increasingly extreme candidates selected by the bases within the two-party system.

Make no mistake Republican Party leadership is all-in on President Trump. Alaska, and other states, cancelled this years Republican primary. Democratic Party leadership acted similarly during the 2012 cycle. This year, the Democrats appear all-in to defeat President Trump with the most progressive and unrealistic policies in our nations history. The two-party system has devolved into an all-out manipulative fight for power; serving the people is an afterthought.

My words are not intended to bash Republicans or Democrats; most of the individual members of those parties are inherently good Americans. Rather, I submit these words as an invitation of empowerment to finally challenge the two-party system in a practical way.

If you care about our future, then I respectfully challenge you, the average American like me, to put your credible name behind meaningful action.

From ballot access to a spot on the debate stage, election cycle infrastructure favors the two-party system. It is tough for a third party to gain access and exposure. Lawsuits, op-eds, and open letter pleas like one I sent to the Commission on Presidential Debates in 2016 will do little to change that. Running the same perennial candidates to maintain ballot access, though a noble and at times selfless endeavor, weakens the brand over time.

This futility will continue until we are ready to take some calculated risks and make bold changes. Its a lost cause to try and reform the Republican and Democratic parties from within. I, like many others, have tried and wear the scars to prove it.

Scattered, well continue to lack a meaningful voice. United, under the strength of an established party, we will have a seat at the table. This approach is not just ideological, it is practical. United under the same party, we in the reasonable middle will eventually obtain the membership numbers needed to (1) guarantee access to ballots and debate stages, and (2) develop a deep enough bench to field high-quality, credible, and electable candidates.

No party is a perfect fit and I certainly dont agree with everything in the Libertarian platform. Neither will you. Focus, instead, on the basics. Libertarians believe in strict adherence to the benefits and burdens of our Constitution, not just cherry-picking certain parts. We believe in smaller governments, free markets, fiscal conservatism and balanced budgets, the separation of church and state, and equal (not special) rights for all regardless of race, religion (or lack thereof), or sexual orientation. While you and I as individuals may disagree on the details and nuances, many in the reasonable middle can unite on those basics.

And yes, every party has its warts the Libertarians are no different, yet receive disproportionate media attention. However, with more credible individuals becoming Libertarians to support those members already working for years behind the scenes to mainstream the Party, the paradigm will shift.

If the above words resonate and we agree on the basics, I invite you to make the switch with me. This is a long-term plan in a political climate inundated with short-term thinking, so keep your immediate expectations in check. Momentum is, however, building. Libertarians are making material gains every year, rapidly expanding their membership rolls and accruing victories in local and state elections at record levels.

Advertisement. For information about purchasing ads, please click here.

Im willing to leverage my credibility, for what its worth, toward that momentum. I hope youll join me.

Peter J. Caltagirone is an Anchorage resident, pilot, and oil and gas attorney licensed in five states. He is now a proud member of the Alaska Libertarian Party. The above words are published in his individual capacity.

View post:

Why I decided to leave the Republican Party - Alaska Landmine

In GOP race, Bill Weld harbored no illusions – The Boston Globe

He declined to enumerate his expectations. The goal is to go all the way, ideally to catch lightning in a bottle, he said.

At his election-night party in Manchester, where about 50 supporters paid little attention to the vote tallies being shown on two large TVs, few seemed to be surprised that Trump was declared the winner shortly after the polls closed.

Karen Mason, 68, a community college professor from Greenland, N.H., said she had decided to vote for Weld because of his courage to stand up to Trump.

Donald Trump has destroyed our country, she said. I was so proud that Weld was going to take on Trump, and I thought he was worth my protest vote.

A Republican before 2016, she vowed to vote for anyone but Trump in November. This is no longer the America that I recognize, said Mason, who passed out literature for Weld.

K. Peddlar Bridges, 73, a writer from Laconia, N.H., got to know Weld when he used to live in Massachusetts, where Weld served two terms as governor in the 1990s.

I think he has the answers we need, he said of Weld.

Asked if he worried that he was wasting his vote by casting it for Weld, Bridges said: If you vote by conscience, that doesnt matter.

About an hour after the polls closed, Weld addressed his supporters, comparing his campaign to a Prussian fighting machine and happy warriors.

Were going to be locked in combat with Mr. Trump for a long time, he said. We hope were going to have a big impact on the election.

Aside from removing Trump, he was running to eliminate large fiscal deficits, remove carbon from the atmosphere, and preserve free trade, he said.

This has been a labor of love, he added.

With 40 percent of the votes tallied, Weld had won about 9 percent.

No matter the outcome, he vowed to continue on through at least Super Tuesday on March 3.

If he continues to lose as is all but certain Weld said he would likely endorse one of the Democrats, so long as the candidate was not too far to the left, he said. If Senator Bernie Sanders wins the Democratic nomination, he said would likely endorse the Libertarian.

Under no circumstances would he support Trump, whom he hoped would have been removed from office after being impeached, he said.

When asked if this would be his last presidential campaign in 2016, he ran as the Libertarian Partys vice presidential candidate he said that was likely.

Then he quickly corrected himself.

Wait, he said, if Im the incumbent, I reserve the right to run for re-election.

David Abel can be reached at dabel@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @davabel.

David Abel can be reached at david.abel@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @davabel.

The rest is here:

In GOP race, Bill Weld harbored no illusions - The Boston Globe

Tulsi Gabbard in New Hampshire – The Nation

Representative Tulsi Gabbard speaks during the New Hampshire Democratic Party State Convention. (Nic Antaya / The Boston Globe via Getty Images)

Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!

Tulsi Gabbards political style has never fit neatly into any traditional partisan paradigm. Most of the coverage she receives from the corporate mediaher termis highly derogatory and dismissive, often dwelling on trivialities in an attempt to delegitimize her. But polls in New Hampshire, where she has focused her campaign, put her as high as 7 percentin contention with some of the supposedly leading candidates. So as a potential factor in the outcome of the primary here on February 11, it is worth taking a closer look at where her support is coming from.Ad Policy

Some of Gabbards most ardent volunteers throughout New Hampshire are self-described libertarians, which at first might seem incongruous. Gabbard advocates a variety of policy proposalslike a form of single-payer health care and a ban on fossil fuelsthat plainly contravene the libertarian philosophy of little or no government intervention in the economic marketplace.

But in my travels across the state (I have covered her here daily for over a month), many of these libertarians told me that they are drawn to Gabbard because they agree with her as a matter of emphasisthat she has made fundamentally transforming US foreign policy her central campaign themeand whatever philosophical disagreements they might have on domestic issues are of lesser importance. Some have even come around to the notion of a government-administered universal health care program on the grounds that if the United States is going to be making such massive expenditures anyway, instead of wasting money on endless overseas conflict, why not redirect those resources toward something that is actually socially beneficial?

As Gabbard put it to me, this reflects her ability to reframe the conversation outside the institutional constructs that usually shape what people think is achievable. Other candidates like Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, and Amy Klobuchar routinely invoke their intention to work across the aisle. But fundamentally, they are all operating from within the same outmoded paradigm, where bipartisanship typically means splitting the difference between how many bombs you drop, or which social welfare programs you cut.

Gabbard also invokes the need to cultivate trans-partisan cooperation, but hers is a different paradigmcentered on her belief that upending the current foreign policy consensus must be any presidents first priority. And indeed, skepticism of US foreign policy is a cross-cutting ideological phenomenon, which explains why Gabbards events across the state draw such an idiosyncratic coterie of supporters: everyone from antiwar peaceniks who idolize Noam Chomsky, to erstwhile Trump supporters who say she is the only Democrat theyd ever consider voting for, to lifelong standard-fare liberals who simply believe she has the right personal characteristics to defeat Trump.Related Article

Its certainly an unusual confluence. But it shows how making foreign policy her foremost, animating themean anomaly in the recent history of US presidential campaignscan change the axis around which politics is normally framed. When politicians are able to make arguments that have resonance across the partisan spectrum, that ability is usually lauded as a valuable political asset. But with Gabbard, the prevailing media depiction is highly scornful; her motives are often depicted as sinister or mysterious. Of course, there are any number of legitimate criticisms one might make of Gabbard. With their condescending derision, though, corporate media merely reveals that it lacks the vocabulary to characterize a candidate whose message transcends ordinary political boundaries.

For instance, while Gabbard clearly recognizes that compromises are often necessary over the course of a legislative process, she draws different lines of demarcation as to which compromises are tolerable. Unlike other candidates, she is not going to compromise with defense industry lobbyists to enact whatever their favored regime change project might be on a given daywhile at the same time insisting that she will treat everyone, even the most unreconstructed war hawks, with basic human decency. Respect does not equate to compliance, she told me.Current Issue

Subscribe today and Save up to $129.

Gabbards most committed supporters tend to be heterodox left-leaning voters, but part of the reason she has drawn support from a notable constituency of libertarians and conservatives is her distinctive personality, shaped by her immersion in the culture of the US militaryin many ways a fundamentally conservative (and male-dominated) institution. She does not traffic in cheap anti-Trump insults, nor does she have much patience for the culture-war theatrics favored by many of Trumps more excitable opponents.

New Hampshire state Representative Werner Horn, a staunch Trump backer who attended one of Gabbards recent town hall events, told me he thinks she would be the most dangerous candidate against Trump because she doesnt buy into his toxic roadshow.

This doesnt mean Gabbard goes easy on Trumpshe calls for his defeat just about every daybut her approach to criticizing Trump differs from the typical Democrats in a way that even many Trump voters find appealing. As Trump abandons his campaign promise to stop squandering resources on needless wars (and starts new conflicts in the Middle East) Gabbard has unique standing to draw attention to those failures without being accused of operating merely as a knee-jerk anti-Trump partisan.

That same mindset has left Gabbard the only remaining Democratic candidate not to be implicated in the futile impeachment melodramawhich this week ended in predictable failure. By voting present on the articles of impeachment in December, Gabbard set herself apart from the whole American political landscape. Her rationale for that vote was explicitly not to absolve Trump of culpability for his many acts of wrongdoing. Rather, it was a repudiation both of Trumpwhose most severe misconduct, like illegally committing acts of war, was nowhere to be found in the impeachment articlesand of a fatally flawed process that relied on dangerous assumptions in the realm of foreign policy.

If you like this article, please give today to help fund The Nations work.

A vote in favor of the impeachment articles would have directly contradicted Gabbards core campaign themes. She elaborated on this a recent event in Manchester, expressing alarm that a principal element of Democrats impeachment case entailed elevating permanent national security state officials like Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and diplomat George Kentthe very sort of people Gabbard is running to dislodge from poweras the guardians of whats been described by Representative Adam Schiff and other impeachment managers as official US policy.

Those statements in those hearings really took me aback, Gabbard said at the Manchester event. Because they were coming from people whomany of them were decades-long bureaucrats serving in the State Departmentwho were basically saying they were the leaders of our countrys US foreign policy, not the president of the United States.

In other words, as much as Gabbard objects to Trumps conduct of foreign policy, the proper recourse in her mind is to vote him out of officenot establish a precedent whereby unelected security state functionaries are permitted to seize quasi-autonomous authority over official policymaking from a democratically elected president.

Gabbard gained a national profile in 2016 for resigning from the Democratic National Committee to endorse Bernie Sanders; she then became one of his most prominent surrogates and was chosen to enter his name into nomination at that years convention. In recent weeks, Gabbard has continued to come to Bernies defense: countering the allegations of his purported sexism made by Elizabeth Warren, visiting one of his New Hampshire field offices, and even using the #ILikeBernie Twitter hashtag.

As Gabbard campaigns in New Hampshire, she has touched on themes that would customarily find resonance on the leftcondemning what she describes as Israels continued illegal occupation of Palestine, for example, as well as the imperialistic mindset of the Washington political classbut detractors allege (with some justification) a certain tension in her outlook. For instance, it is true that Gabbard, the first Hindu ever elected to Congress, has taken a conciliatory posture toward a number of ignominious foreign leadersnamely Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, as well as Syrias Bashar al-Assad. But often ignored is that Gabbard has also made a point to meet with opposition figures in both India and Syria, born of her conviction that diplomatic engagement requires meeting everyone, without preconditions, as a necessary prerequisite to shifting US foreign policy away from fruitless interventionism. (Hence, she was the first candidate to denounce the Trump administrations regime change gambit in Venezuela, and is the only candidate besides Sanders to label the ousting of Evo Morales in Bolivia a coup.)

In my observations, Gabbards rhetoric does not materially change depending on the person shes talking to or the platform shes speaking on. Critics often complain about her frequent appearances on Fox News, but overlook that she says much the same thing in that venue as she does on left-wing independent media. (And she attracted the ire of the Republican National Committee for condemning Trumps assassination of Qassim Suleimani on Fox News last month). Her logic of broad-based engagement even resulted in Gabbards meeting with Trump himself, shortly after the 2016 election, to discuss foreign policy. She said at the time that the purpose of the meeting was to dissuade him from filling his cabinet with neoconservative warmongers. Now that Trump has done just that, she again has unique standing to call him to account.

The same pattern applies to her impeachment position. In declining to echo the standard Democratic talking points on the subjectshe has repeatedly said that a shortsighted impeachment would only embolden Trump, making it more likely that hes reelectedGabbard is singularly positioned to detach herself from the political fallout in the aftermath of Trumps acquittal. She may still not be electable in the way pundits usually understand the term. But we have already seen the definition change to accommodate a black president, female candidatesand now even a socialist. Perhaps the pundits will be proven wrong again.

Original post:

Tulsi Gabbard in New Hampshire - The Nation

Can We Own Our Thoughts and Words? – The Libertarian Republic

Rocky Ferrenburg

I was listening to Dave Smiths podcast, Part of the Problem, and they brought up a topic that seems to be a spot of contention for Libertarians: Intellectual Property. Intellectual property is the concept that someone owns an idea and that others cannot reproduce that idea without the owners permission. Being a musician, this is an area where I have thought long and hard, yet I still am not sure if there is an easy answer.

Most people would agree that whoever discovered that 2+2 equals 4 shouldnt be entitled to compensation every time we do basic arithmetic. However, many also believe that if someone writes a book, someone else cant reproduce that work without the original creator being compensated. This creates an issue in the realm of intellectual property.

One solution for this issue is patents. The problem here is that a patent says someone exclusively owns an idea and no one else should be able to recreate it. There are patents that allow for people to be justly compensated for the use of their idea, but not all.

Pharmaceutical companies rely heavily on patents and intellectual property laws. This keeps companies from being able to reverse engineer a drug and provide it to consumers at a lower cost. The second company did not invest the capital to bring the drug to market, so why should they get to swoop in at the last second and steal the idea? Thats where people get all tied up on this topic.

Why can someone patent drugs, books, and machines, but not mathematics or words?

I am a musician, but furthermore, I am a lyricist. I write songs for myself and other people. I would consider my lyrics to be a product of my own creation. Smith would say that they arent because the words are not a scarce resource. My use of the word doesnt affect someone elses ability to use them. So, words are basically in the definition of a public good. However, lets look a little deeper.

If I write a song and put it to music. I would own the lyrics, and maybe even the melody. What I know for sure that I dont own is the chord progression, the tempo, or the key. These things individually I cannot own. What I can do is mix my talents with all of them, and my ability to construct a song, and said song would become the product of my creation.

If this isnt so, then are all books free? Are all songs free? Why would anyone create them? Just so people could come to shows? Just so people would come to hear you speak? If that is the case, then should we throw people out for recording these events?

I certainly wouldnt advocate for throwing someone in jail, but if someone was reprinting your book with their name on it and distributing it, then I would definitely be on your side in a civil suit.

I dont know where the line is drawn. I am not sure that there is a clear-cut answer to this. I know that drugs would be a lot cheaper and a lot more competitive if they didnt have to go through all the bureaucracy. I know that BMI and ASCAP are swindlers that abuse laws for their own benefit. What I do know is that before we jump out and start telling people that their art is worthless and they shouldnt be able to protect it, we need to make sure that we are a lot more aware of what intellectual property actually is.

Rocky Ferrenburg grew up in Anchorage, Alaska, and now lives with his wife and three daughters in Twin Falls, ID. He is a writer, podcaster, and musician. Rocky has also spent time as a political advocate, candidate, and campaign manager. While running his own business, an event services company, Rocky sat on committees for music festivals and has been a talent buyer for concerts. Rocky has five degrees from the College of Southern Idaho, two bachelors degrees from Washington State University, and is currently working on his MS in Applied Economics from Southern New Hampshire University. Rockys true passions lie in writing, music, and politics.

Follow this link:

Can We Own Our Thoughts and Words? - The Libertarian Republic

Trump’s Former Primary Opponent Just Challenged Conservatives to Support the Democratic Nominee, Whoever It Is – Second Nexus

Make no mistake: Former Congressman Joe Walsh (R-IL) is a Republican.

He was a prominent figure of the Tea Party, he pushed conspiracy theories that former President Barack Obama was from Kenya, and even appeared to promote violent insurrection should then-candidate Donald Trump lose the 2016 presidential race.

Walsh is by no means a moderate, yet he's one of the few Republicans who has publicly and loudly called Trump out over the past couple of years.

He even issued an apology for helping elect Trump last year.

Last summer, Walsh announced that he would be challenging Trump in the 2020 election for President. With Trump's approval rating high within the Republican Party, it was always a longshot and Walsh ended his campaign last week.

That hasn't stopped him from urging voters of all political persuasions to vote for the Democratic nominee, no matter who that person ends up being.

Days after Walsh said he'd rather have a socialist than a dictator in the White House, he posted a tweet urging Conservatives to pledge their vote to the yet-to-be-determined Democratic nominee.

Walsh stressed that "ALL OF US" must come together to stop Trump from serving a second term.

Even with Walsh's conventionally far-Right stances, much of his warnings against Trump have fallen on deaf ears among his fellow Republicans, leading him to refer to the party as "a cult."

He recently implored a Republican crowd to reject Trump, saying:

At which point the crowd began cheering and chanting "four more years."

Watch below.

But at least some people seem to be heeding Walsh's plea for Conservatives and Libertarians to take his pledge.

That staunch Republican Joe Walsh went from MAGA to endorsing any Democratic candidate running against Trump illustrated the tumult Trump has imposed on the country after only three years.

It will take a massive voter turnout to have a hope of defeating Donald Trump.

Are you registered to vote? Check your registration here to avoid any surprises on election day.

See original here:

Trump's Former Primary Opponent Just Challenged Conservatives to Support the Democratic Nominee, Whoever It Is - Second Nexus

Feb 12 Feb 12 Candidates Speak at Packed Amarillo Pioneer Forum – The Amarillo Pioneer

On Tuesday night in Amarillo, the Amarillo Pioneers candidate forum was the place to be.

At the American Legion Post 54 in downtown Amarillo, over 300 attendees packed the hall to hear the candidates running for U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives District 13, Railroad Commission, and a number of local offices. Nine of the Republican candidates running to replace U.S. Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Clarendon) attended, as did the three Democratic and one Libertarian hopeful running for the seat.

The event featured introductions from the candidates and questions written from the audience. Len Walker served as the chief moderator for the evening and Brad Torch, Trent Rosser, and Tom Warren also served as moderators at various points.

Local community businesses and organizations generously contributed to the event, including support from Roasters Coffee, Burkett Outdoor Advertising, and more. Eloy Heras also generously donated the use of his microphone system for the event.

We cannot wait until the next forum and we hope to see everyone there.

Continued here:

Feb 12 Feb 12 Candidates Speak at Packed Amarillo Pioneer Forum - The Amarillo Pioneer

NWA Letters to the Editor – NWAOnline

POA election doesn't

seek those who speak

The Bella Vista Property Owners Association is conducting an election to elect three directors to the board. There are two things a potential candidate has to do to get accepted. One, he/she has to win the election. Two, the candidate has to sign a form called the Statement of Compliance. It is used as a loyalty oath, which is a pledge of allegiance to abide by the policies of the association (corporation). In other words, the director has signed that he/she will do what they are told to do or the POA hierarchy will remove them and appoint someone who will. We must remember that this is a corporate board and not a people board. This is one reason the board members rarely listen to a member when they are trying to address the board during the public comment segment of the board meetings. The board members have signed a promise to listen to the corporation and not the member.

Immediately after the winners are announced on election night the winners are taken to a side room at Riordan Hall and are told by the POA staff attorney and the POA president that the word "association" does not mean "members." The word "association" is the corporation Cooper Communities Inc. and the POA administration. They go on to say that corporation knows what is best for the future of Bella Vista and if the members had any control they might make a mistake that would be detrimental to the property owners.

If the candidate refuses to sign the compliance form, he/she is immediately not accepted to serve and will be replaced by an appointee who will. This happened to me in my 2006 election. There were two elected board members who signed the oath, but were thrown off the board because they were found guilty of breaking their promise by speaking publicly without the corporations' permission. There were three other elected board members who felt they should be allowed to see the then-CEO's contract before they were forced to sign it. All three resigned in disgust. There were two others that, because they voted contrary to the other seven, were so ostracized that they resigned under duress.

In the real world too many politicians who owe their election to big corporate campaign money tend to listen to the corporations' wishes rather than the people who elected them.

The way our POA board operates is not uncommon in the real world. Most public board and commission members act similarly. Almost any board members or commission members are expected to drink the coffee, munch the peanuts and throw their hands in the air when the COO, CEO or president tell them to. If they want to stay on the board and get re-elected they will never ask any questions or offer any personal opinions. If they do have a different opinion, it is best to stay seated, swallow deeply, blink three times and keep their mouths shut.

Jim Parsons

Bella Vista

In county race, voters

shouldn't rely on 'R'

There are two Republicans running for the open seat of District 7 Justice of The Peace: Doug Farner and Joseph Bollinger. Justices are members of the County Quorum Court and represent the legislative body for the county, much like a city council for a city. Their important powers include: levying of taxes; appropriating public finds for the expenses of the county; establishing the number and compensation of elected officials and county employees; and providing for any service or performance of any function relating to county affairs.

Republicans should be aware that Joseph Bollinger is a former Libertarian who has recently switched parties and now calls himself a Republican. Apparently, his past failed attempt to get elected as a Libertarian prompted this change. I spoke with Mr. Bollinger recently and it is clear to me that his far-right, Libertarian views have not changed. This is not the time for more extremism in government, be it city, county, state or national.

A far better choice for District 7 JP is Doug Farner. Mr. Farner's views and experience in elected city government positions, appointed positions and volunteer activities make him the right candidate to represent mainstream Republican principles in this important county office.

I urge my Republican friends to vote for someone with experience who will work effectively with the entire Quorum Court to move Benton County forward and not vote for someone just because they have an "R" next to their name.

Dave Barfield

Bella Vista

Print Headline: NWA Letters to the Editor

Continued here:

NWA Letters to the Editor - NWAOnline

Meet the Man Challenging Donald Trump For the 2020 GOP Presidential Nomination – The National Interest Online

While public attention was focused on the results of the competitive Democratic primary in New Hampshire, the results of the Republican primary are not worth ignoring. A sort of two-man race developed between incumbent President Donald Trump, and his contender, former Massachusetts Governor William Weld.

Historically, New Hampshire has been the bedrock of fruitless primary challengers. Most significantly, in 1968 Minnesota Senator Eugene McCarthy won 42% of the vote, scaring the incumbent President Lyndon Johnson into forswearing reelection. In 1992, Pat Buchanan won 37.5% in the Granite state against George H. W. Bush, which predestined the latters defeat in the general election that year.

Bill Welds challenge fell far below that threshold, failing to reach the double digits (9.1%). This is a lower result than both of incumbent President Richard Nixons 1972 primary challengers, conservative Rep. John Ashbrook (9.7%) and liberal Republican Rep. Pete McCloskey (19.8%).

The Fake News Media is looking hard for the Big Democrat Story, but there is nothing too fabulous. Wouldnt a big story be that I got more New Hampshire Primary Votes than any incumbent president, in either party, in the history of that Great State? Not an insignificant fact! tweeted Trump last night.

Weld began hispolitical career in the 1980s, first as U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts, and then head of the Criminal Division of the Justice Department. While in D.C., Weld was one of the Reagan administrations hardline drug warriors, at one point advancing the idea of using the U.S. Air Force to shoot down planes suspected of carrying illegal narcotics.

In 1990, Weld was elected Governor of Massachusetts, and in 1994 he was reelected with 70.9% of the vote, the largest margin of victory in state history. As a supporter of both abortion rights and civil unions for gay couples, Weld was a staple of liberal republicanism in the 1990s. He was the Republican candidate for senate in 1996 but was defeated by incumbent John Kerry. Weld later resigned his governorship in the summer of 1997, after being nominated by President Bill Clinton to be Ambassador to Mexico. His nomination was torpedoed by North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms, and he was never confirmed.

After an abortive run for Governor of New York in 2006, Weld reentered national politics in 2016, accepting the vice-presidential nomination of the Libertarian Party on a ticket headed by former Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson. Weld, having previously endorsed John Kasich that election year and repeatedly flattering Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, was a controversial pick in liberty-minded circles.

Weld rejoined the Republican Party at the start of 2019, and soon announced his presidential campaign. He engendered controversy when he claimed Donald Trump had committed treason during his phone call to the Ukrainian President, the even that lead to the impeachment imbroglio this past fall. The penalty for treason under the U.S. code is death. Thats the only penalty, Weld proscribed.

The former governor was not perturbed by his showing. Im going to declare that Ive exceeded expectations no matter what, Weld told The Boston Globe yesterday afternoon. Weld received 1.3% of the vote in the Iowa caucuses last week.

Bill Weld has said that after the primary process, hed be happy [to support] any of the centrist Democrats in the general election, including former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg or former Vice President Joe Biden, who hed vote for in a heartbeat.

Hunter DeRensis is a senior reporter for the National Interest. Follow him on Twitter@HunterDeRensis.

Go here to see the original:

Meet the Man Challenging Donald Trump For the 2020 GOP Presidential Nomination - The National Interest Online

The Company That Wants to Fling Rockets Into Space With a Giant Centrifuge – Singularity Hub

The rapidly falling cost of getting into orbit has spurred a boom in the space industry as a host of new applications become economical. Now a secretive startup plans to slash the cost to just $250,000 by flinging rockets into space rather than firing them.

Over the last decade, the pioneering work done by SpaceX has shown that getting stuff into orbit doesnt need to be so expensive and that there are viable business opportunities to be had in the private space industry. Combined with advances in satellite technology, theres now a thriving market for small, inexpensive spacecraft in low-Earth orbit doing everything from remote sensing to delivering broadband internet access.

But while costs have fallen dramatically, the cheapest option for reaching low-Earth orbita rideshare on SpaceXs Falcon 9still starts at $1 million, and launches only happen twice a month at best. California-based startup SpinLaunch says its technology will allow up to five launches a day for as little as $250,000.

The company has held its cards close to its chest since its founding in 2014, but last month it gave Wired a close-up look at its ambitious plans. The idea is to build a centrifuge the size of a football field that will spin a rocket around until it reaches a speed of 5,000 miles per hour and then release it into the void.

So far the company has built a prototype about 12 yards across that has managed to get an 11-pound projectile up to 4,000 miles per hour, but they are now in the process of building one three times bigger at New Mexicos Spaceport America. They hope it will be able to launch 110-pound test vehicles on suborbital flights by the end of this year.

The centrifuge consists of an electrical motor that spins a long arm made of kevlar and carbon fiber. A launch vehicle is attached to one end with a counterweight on the other side, and theyre spun around in a partial vacuum to avoid air resistance. The centrifuge slowly ramps up the speed over a few hours, and then when its at peak velocity, the rocket is released and an airlock opens for a fraction of a second to let it fly out of the launch tube.

Even these high speeds wont be enough to get all the way to orbit, so the rocket will have engines that will kick in at 200,000 feet. But because the air is so thin at this altitude, it will only require about a minutes worth of burn, drastically reducing the fuel bill. SpinLaunch has already built a 25-foot test model of the launch vehicle, which it says will be able to carry a 200-pound satellite.

The company has raised $80 million and has some big-name backers, including Airbus Ventures and Alphabets venture capital arm, GV. Its also secured a contract from the US Department of Defense under a program aimed at developing the ability to launch satellites at very short notice.

Unsurprisingly, though, theres considerable skepticism. Many of the engineers that Wired spoke to raised doubts over whether rockets and satellites would be able to withstand the incredible g-forces10,000 times stronger than gravitythat theyd be subjected to in the centrifuge. Others have suggested the transition from the centrifuges vacuum to the much denser atmosphere outside as the rocket is released could be like hitting a brick wall.

Founder and CEO Jonathan Yaney told Wired theyve tested all kinds of components in the centrifuge, including radios, batteries, GPS modules, and even an iPhone, and theyve all survived. He did admit that the launch vehicle will be more like a missile than a rocket and some components may need to be ruggedized, but Stanford aerospace engineer Juan Alonso, who did due diligence for one of the investors, says their math checks out.

Theres still a long way to go, though, and in the meantime there are plenty of other players trying to muscle into this space. The price of SpaceXs rideshares continues to fall and RocketLab already provides dedicated small-sat missions for as little as $5.7 million with a payload capacity of up to $500.

Startup Astra is also aiming to do daily launches of up to 450 pounds for just $2.5 million, and that price could fall to as low as $1 million. Thats not to mention Virgin Orbits LauncherOne, Fireflys Alpha, Ariane Groups Vega C rocket, and Indias Small Satellite Launch Vehicle, which could all debut this year.

Whoever the winners are, it looks like low-Earth orbit is going to be getting pretty crowded.

Image Credit: Rendering of the inside of a centrifuge. Image courtesy of SpinLaunch

Follow this link:

The Company That Wants to Fling Rockets Into Space With a Giant Centrifuge - Singularity Hub

Do Physicalists Believe in Black Holes? – Discovery Institute

Many Darwinists object to the sobriquet materialist they consider themselves physicalists. Responding to an article by Bernardo Kastrup, Consciousness Cannot Have Evolved, Darwinist Jerry Coyne explains:

Kastrup is dead wrong that materialism requires all entities to be measurable. [It is] is dead wrong that materialism requires all entities to be measurable. Heres a question: do you have a liver? The answer is based not on measurement, but on observation. I have never heard a definition of materialism that requires quantitative measurement, but it seems to be one [that is] confected to rule out consciousness as a material phenomenon, or the result of a material phenomenon. Unfortunately, [that] rules out a lot of material phenomena that cant be quantified as well, like love. (Ill let readers quibble about that one.)

Here, for instance, is the definition of physicalism (which is said to be the same as materialism) from [the] authoritativeStanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy(my emphasis):

Physicalism is the thesis that everything is physical, or as contemporary philosophers sometimes put it, that everything supervenes on the physical. The thesis is usually intended as a metaphysical thesis, parallel to the thesis attributed to the ancient Greek philosopher Thales, that everything is water, or the idealism of the 18th Century philosopher Berkeley, that everything is mental. The general idea is that the nature of the actual world (i.e. the universe and everything in it) conforms to a certain condition, the condition of being physical. Of course, physicalists dont deny that the world might contain many items that at first glance dont seem physical items of a biological, or psychological, or moral, or social nature. But they insist nevertheless that at the end of the day such items are either physical or supervene on the physical.

That seems pretty accurate, especially with supervene on the physical at the end (for that is what consciousness is), and it says nothing about quantitative characterization.

The observation that materialism implies measurability derives from the Cartesian splitting of the world into res extense (extended stuff) and res cogitans (thinking stuff). Modern materialists are basically Cartesians who have jettisoned res cogitans. Everything, to materialists like Coyne, is extended stuff and the relationships between extended stuff. Everything is in some real sense measurable.

Obviously, this materialist view of reality leaves out much of reality (love, reason, mercy, truth, etc.) so skittish materialists like Coyne often call themselves physicalists, which means that they only accept as real things that can be observed and tested by physical science.

But with 20th-century science, even physicalism is untenable. For example, physics demonstrates the reality of singularities black holes and the Big Bang itself that are by definition not observable or testable by physical science. Singularities are undefined terms in Einsteins equations of general relativity terms in which the denominator goes to zero. They are quite real, but they are not physical in any sense they are undefined by the methods of mathematics and physical science. Now of course the consequences of singularities can be observed and defined the residual background radiation of the Big Bang, or the behavior of matter in the vicinity of a black hole are certainly observable. But the Big Bang singularity itself and the singularity at the core of each black hole are not natural they are not a part of the natural world, and they are not things that we can know by the methods of physical science. If we could know them, they wouldnt singularities they wouldnt be black holes or the Big Bang.

Some of the most important advances in modern science entail the recognition of the existence of very real things that are unknowable by natural science. The supernatural is very real, and the materialist/physicalist denial of this reality is a rejection of modern science.

Editors note: See also:

How Black Holes Figure in the Argument for Cosmic Intelligent Design

First Ever Black Hole Image Points to Cosmologys Big Message

Photo credit: Event Horizon Telescope [CC BY 4.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

Continued here:

Do Physicalists Believe in Black Holes? - Discovery Institute