Sunday, April 7, 2019

A new look at the libertarian "giant of SF"

Robert A. Heinlein: the ‘giant of SF’ was sexist, racist — and certainly no stylist | The Spectator - Christopher Priest:

March 30, 2019 - "Robert A. Heinlein appears in his late fifties to have come across a how-to book about sex. Thereafter an instant expert, he wrote novel after novel brimming with it, much of it laughably theoretical and, well, wrong.... Not unrelated to this, he was a rampant sexist, the sort of man who praises the superiority of women while inadvertently revealing that deep down he is full of prejudices and controlling instincts. Worse, he was a racist in an identical way. Examples abound, most of them devastatingly analysed in Farah Mendlesohn’s The Pleasant Profession of Robert A. Heinlein....

"Mendlesohn describes how Heinlein, who when younger had made a well-earned name for himself as an author of serious and innovative speculative fiction, became a rotten writer in the second half of his career. He always told stories well, but his style was execrable. From Starship Troopers (1959) onwards, his books had an endlessly hectoring, lecturing tone, almost always phrased in long and unconvincing conversations full of paternalistic advice, sexual remarks, libertarian dogma and folksy slang....

"The stories and novels from the pre-war part of his career were notable for the firm sense of competence and reliability. They were, like his later work, told well. His style was terse, rather like that of a literate drill sergeant. Unlike the other science fiction current at the time, Heinlein’s speculative stories were not only set in plausible futures, but the people who moved in those worlds were strong, believable and effective.

"At the end of the war he began a series of juvenile novels, aimed unerringly at young readers but told in the same didactic voice. These novels, not published in the UK until years later when Heinlein was famous, had a profound effect on their American readers. There is still today a generation of middle-aged and elderly American science fiction writers for whom Heinlein is in a position of seminal influence, similar to Hemingway in other literary circles. Heinlein’s influence on modern American science fiction is not universal, but still detectable.

"In the 1950s he wrote some of his best adult novels, notably Double Star (1956), in which an actor is recruited to impersonate an important politician, and The Door into Summer (1957) — a time-travel novel for cat lovers everywhere.

"On politics, Heinlein wrong-footed his critics. Broadly speaking he was always a libertarian, but when he was young he described himself as a left-leaning liberal, and when older became not exactly extreme right-wing but everything but. He was full of seeming contradictions. As a libertarian he of course loathed big governments, but also as a radical thinker believed in world government, the biggest one of all. He supported the family unit but never had children. He was outspoken on the need for an American nuclear build-up, and was a vocal supporter of civilian guns — he coined the phrase 'an armed society is a polite society' — but several of the later novels questioned the actual and moral deterrent effectiveness of guns.

"Mendlesohn’s book bespeaks long and detailed work, but the result is difficult to read and follow.... For now it will act as an instruction manual on Heinlein, but its academic reliance on secondary texts will deter many readers who might otherwise be interested."

Read more: https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/03/robert-a-heinlein-the-giant-of-sf-was-sexist-racist-and-certainly-no-stylist/
'via Blog this'

Saturday, April 6, 2019

Iraq was the Democrats' war, too

When Iraq Was Clinton’s War - Chip Gibbons, The Jacobin:

May 6, 2016 - "When [George W.] Bush entered the White House, the US (with help from the UK) was bombing Iraq an average of three times a week. In 1999, the US spent  $1 billion dropping bombs in Iraq; in 2000, that number was up to $1.4 billion....

"Omitting the decade leading up to the 2003 invasion distorts the roots of the war, which wasn’t just a product of post–9/11 hysteria or the creation of various Bush administration personalities. The February 2001 assault was part of a bipartisan policy that put continuous war with Iraq at the center of strategies to maintain US hegemony in the Middle East....

"[A]t a February 1998 town hall... Secretary of State Madeleine Albright tried to sell the public on bombing Iraq. Albright was repeatedly interrupted by antiwar activists, and ... replied, 'No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction'.... Just a few years later, similar scenes, with different players, would be reprised in the buildup to the Bush administration’s invasion.

"Much as George W. Bush inherited his initial Iraq policy from Bill Clinton, Clinton inherited his from Bush’s father. Following Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait, the UN Security Council imposed sanctions on Iraq.... Even after Hussein pulled out, however, the US ... refused to allow the sanctions to be lifted. Their new rationale was that the restrictions were needed to  disarm Iraq. Yet as early as 1992 the US knew Iraq had given up its weapons of mass destruction, and the sanctions remained....

"Iraq experienced shortages of food, medicine, and clean drinking water. And a 1995 Lancet study sponsored by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization concluded that 576,000 children under the age of five perished because of the policy, while a “conservative” estimate put the death toll for the same age group at 350,000. Dennis Halliday, a thirty-four-year UN veteran, resigned ... after spending a little over a year as the UN Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq. He said the sanctions constituted genocide.... Clinton simply denied the facts in question....

"Like his successor, one of Clinton’s early acts in office was to bomb Baghdad. In 1993, he sent twenty-three cruise missiles to hit the city.... Five years later, Clinton signed the 'Iraq Liberation Act' into law, formalizing the US’s demand for regime change. The legislation, which also appropriated $97 million to fund Iraqi opposition groups, was followed up with ... Operation Desert Fox ... sold to the public as retribution for Hussein’s decision to kick UN weapons inspectors out of the country. Yet ... Clinton ordered the inspectors out. Saddam didn’t kick them out....

"From the end of Operation Desert Fox [in December 1998] until the 2003 invasion, the US and UK bombed Iraq at least once a week."

Read more: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/05/war-iraq-bill-clinton-sanctions-desert-fox/
'via Blog this'

Friday, April 5, 2019

Adult-use cannabis legalized in Guam

Governor Signs Bill Legalizing Marijuana In Guam | Marijuana Moment - Tom Angell:

April 3, 2019 - "Guam became the first U.S. jurisdiction to legalize marijuana in 2019 with the signature of Gov. Lou Leon Guerrero (D) on Thursday. When it goes into effect, the U.S. territory’s new law will permit adults 21 and older to possess and grow cannabis, and it will create a system of licensed and regulated businesses to produce and sell marijuana.

"There will be a 15 percent excise tax on sales, with revenues going toward law enforcement, drug treatment and agriculture programs....

"Lawmakers in Guam’s unicameral legislature sent the legislation to Guerrero last week in a narrow vote of 8 to 7....

“'Given all the info, studies done, experiences shared, advice [and] anecdotes about marijuana, what would a responsible community government leader do to protect the interests and welfare of the community?” Guerrero said.... 'Keeping it illegal in my mind rejects the notion that it exists and that the underground market will continue to prey on us. We have to be ahead of this and we have to control it.'

"The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, another U.S. territory, legalized marijuana last year, and the U.S. Virgin Islands enacted a medical cannabis law in January.

"Guam was the first U.S. territory to allow medical marijuana via a voter-approved ballot measure in 2014, but its implementation moved forward slowly."

Read more: https://www.marijuanamoment.net/governor-signs-bill-legalizing-marijuana-in-guam/
'via Blog this'

Thursday, April 4, 2019

1st Amendment protects panhandling, judge rules


Judge Throws Out Panhandling Law, Says Physical Interaction Is Free Speech
"When a panhandler approaches a car in the intersection — his hand out, his eyes wide — that physical interaction is protected by the First Amendment, a federal district judge ruled Monday when he threw out an Arkansas city's panhandling ban.

"It's the latest such ban to be found unconstitutional since a 2015 Supreme Court decision made it harder for the government to pass laws regarding the content of speech. That case, Reed v. Town of Gilbert, had to do with regulating church signs, but courts around the country have cited the case as they strike down panhandling laws.

"To contend with an increase in panhandling at busy intersections, the city of Hot Springs in 2016 passed an ordinance imposing 'an absolute ban' on solicitation on streets or in medians. After the American Civil Liberties Union sued, the city repealed the ordinance.... In 2017, the city passed a new version [that] eliminated all references to panhandling and instead made it illegal for pedestrians [and] the occupant of a motor vehicle to 'interact physically' while the engine was running on a public roadway.

"But that language was still constitutionally problematic, Judge Robert Dawson wrote.... physical interaction between pedestrians and the occupants of a vehicle clearly has free speech implications, the judge wrote. 'The Court can think of no reason why a pedestrian would intentionally attempt physical interaction with a motor vehicle or its occupants other than to communicate a message'....

"Hot Springs attorney Brian Albright said via email ... it's too early to say whether the city will appeal the ruling.

"The Reed case 'has placed literally every panhandling ordinance in the United States at least under risk,' said First Amendment scholar Enrique Armijo, associate dean for academic affairs at Elon University School of Law.... Hot Springs 'did a better job than most cities with respect to defining the banned activity in a way that refers more to the conduct than the speech,' said Armijo, who thinks the judge's ruling could be overturned on appeal."

Read more: https://www.npr.org/2019/04/02/709251256/judge-throws-out-panhandling-law-says-physical-interaction-is-free-speech

Wednesday, April 3, 2019

Wrongfully convicted men freed after 43 years

2 men wrongfully convicted of 1976 murder freed after 43 years behind bars - ABC News - Meghan Keneally:

March 29, 2019 - "There were bullet holes in the window screen and the curtains, but the main witness said the two shooters were inside and at the foot of her bed. The witness said she saw the muzzle flashes from two guns, but ballistics testing said that the bullets at the scene were fired from only one gun. People at a nearby party said they heard the gunshots, and if the shots were fired inside the bedroom, auditory testing said that wouldn't have been possible. And there were dozens of people at that birthday party down the street from the shooting that would have testified that the suspects were at the party -– therefore providing an alibi....

"But these pieces of evidence and the shifting story of the witness were not considered during a two day trial in 1976, and two men landed in jail as a result. One was sentenced to death, and the other was sentenced to life in prison.

"On Thursday, they walked free after a review of their case prompted the newly-formed Conviction Integrity Review (CIR) division of the State’s Attorney’s Office in Florida determined that they 'no longer [had] confidence in the integrity of the convictions or guilt of the accused'....

"Clifford Williams, who is now 76, and his nephew Nathan Myer, who is 61, had their convictions vacated. The last time they were free men, they were 33 and 18-years-old, respectively. They each spent 43 years behind bars for a murder that not only did they not commit, but that someone else [Nathaniel Lawson] had confessed to years after the killing....

"The murder in question was the May, 1976 shooting death of Jeanette Williams, who was not related to Clifford Williams but was renting an apartment from him when she was murdered. Nina Marshall ... was in bed with her and was also shot by the assailant but survived.... Marshall was the one that said that there were two shooters inside the bedroom, and subsequently identified Williams and Myers as the shooters. Both men have maintained their innocence throughout the process....

"Florida is one of 33 states that compensate individuals who were wrongly imprisoned and subsequently exonerated. The state stipulates that individuals can receive $50,000 per year that they were wrongfully convicted but with a cap of $2,000,000. The compensation law excludes anyone with either one prior violent felony or more than one non-violent felony. Myers will be eligible for such compensation, but Williams will not."

Read more: https://abcnews.go.com/US/men-wrongfully-convicted-1976-murder-freed-43-years/story?id=62012500&cid=social_fb_abcn&fbclid=IwAR2x3rLrSqLge-4TK7ExR3Qt5uhVdGAlUD6SXSnU3Ke9Zo_7JodEpUeB5IU
'via Blog this'

Tuesday, April 2, 2019

Climate skeptics call for President's Commission

News - Expectations High for President’s Commission on Climate Security | Heartland Institute - H. Sterling Burnett:

March 22, 2019 - "The Heartland Institute was among 37 organizations and 112 individuals who signed a letter strongly urging President Donald Trump to move forward with rumored plans to form a President’s Commission on Climate Security (PCCS) with distinguished physicist Dr. William Happer, the administration’s senior director of the National Security Council (NSC) office for emerging technologies, to head it. The panel would conduct an independent review of the science that underpins official government climate reports, such as the latest National Climate Assessment....

"It’s a common misunderstanding, due to the fawning portrayal of its work by the mainstream media, that the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has objectively studied and presented the facts about climate change.... IPCC, as the name implies, is a political organization, not a scientific one. As such, IPCC was not charged with examining the causes and consequences of climate change but was instead directed from its founding to limit its enquiries into the 'human causes' of change....

"Many scientists have advanced their careers and raked in big government research grants by toeing the IPCC’s party line that humans are causing dangerous climate change and we need a government takeover of the economy, something like the Green New Deal, to fix it. Time and again, researchers and organizations have manipulated or altered data, and they have suppressed research ... to make the facts conform to their politically convenient theory....

"As the letter states: 'In our view, an independent review of these reports is long overdue. Serious problems and shortcomings have been raised repeatedly in the past by highly-qualified scientists only to be ignored or dismissed by the federal agencies in charge of producing the reports.... The conclusions and predictions made by these reports are the basis for proposed energy policies that could cost trillions of dollars in less than a decade and tens of trillions of dollars over several decades....

"'We note that defenders of the climate consensus have already mounted a public campaign against the proposed commission. We find this opposition curious. If the defenders are confident that the science contained in official reports is robust, then they should welcome a review that would finally put to rest the doubts that have been raised'....

"In the end, from the perspective of climate alarmists opposed to the PCCS, Trump’s big sin in forming PCCS is to question the claim climate science is settled, and Happer’s big sins are to defend the need for high-quality data and to point out a modestly warmer world and increased atmospheric carbon dioxide will bring benefits as well as costs. All the panic, hyperbolic gnashing of teeth, and name-calling accompanying speculation concerning [PCCS] in recent weeks comes down to this.

"This is certainly not an anti-science conspiracy. Neither good science nor sound policy can be advanced without an unbiased examination and debate of the facts, the cornerstone of scientific discovery."

'via Blog this'

Monday, April 1, 2019

How to write "alt.right"

How To Write Like An Alt-Right “Libertarian” - Opting Out - Being Libertarian - James Smith:

April 1, 2019 - "Not making enough money from the usual libertarian channels?...  Frustrated that the philosophy of liberty has not provided the ultimate purpose for your up-to-now meaningless existence? Then you might want to get on the alt-right train. Don’t go in blind – let this be your guide to navigating your way through an alt-right libertarian article.

"Write like a German. You’re trying to sound intellectual. You want to be respectable ... to take the intellectual high ground when people come after you with pitchforks. The answer is to write as if you haven’t yet experienced a human emotion.... You are a Vulcan, unclouded by the petty emotional biases of men. You only see things through the cold hard light of reason....

"Hans-Herman Hoppe is a good example to imitate (which is convenient, since that is all you have read). His deconstructions are systematic, impersonal and irrefutable. We must write in the same way....

"Make an edgy but ultimately banal point ... go for the most politically-incorrect conclusion you can find.... It doesn’t have to be socially-acceptable. It’s better if it’s not.... Clutch as many straws as you like – when you write like Hoppe, you can make anything sound like perfect reason.

"Am I wrong? Am I wrong? When the inevitable backlash comes, the best line of defense is to repeatedly ask to be pointed out where you are incorrect. Of course, if you’ve done this well, you are not technically incorrect, merely offensive and irrelevant. Block anyone who, by some miracle, points out your error....

"Shrug your shoulders as if you’re an impartial Socratic mega-brain.... You can’t even understand why anybody would get upset at the mere truth-telling of the alt-right. We can only guess that the irrationality of man knows no bounds.

"Everyone who doesn’t agree is a commie.... Nuance is for cucks. It’s imperative to equivocate every disagreement with nothing less than global communism. The libertarian movement is being taken over by leftists.... Even the charges of fascists and Nazis don’t make sense because the Nazis were just leftists – like, duh bro.

"Be an enormous hypocrite.... You can make up for your history of heavy drinking, adultery and polyamorous love nests by peddling the most uncharitable view of alternative lifestyles. Humility is a lefty, feminine thing."

Read more: https://beinglibertarian.com/how-to-write-like-an-alt-right-libertarian-opting-out/
'via Blog this'