If You Only Read One Essay Today…

It should be this one.

Read it. Then pass it on to every American you know who might possibly give a wit. And then pass it on to all those you know who obviously do not.

In this Republic tyranny should not be stood for.

Leave a Reply to T. Greer Cancel reply


I hope people have time for two essays, then — this one left me a little flat.

– Oh Boo Hoo, Facebook is going to kill us. The Internet is the greatest thing that has happened to liberty since President Harding's untimely demise gave us Mister Coolidge. I have been able to learn so much and connect with liberty devotees all over the world.

No we're not all in the tavern and prepared to go throw goods in the harbor (though I did score an invite to a Samizdata.net bash in London. I regrettably did not attend, but cold see getting up in some Guy Fawkesian mischief…) but the virtual community is an unalloyed good. Even the boys at Reason are with me on that.

— Keep Senator Russ Feingold because he voted against the Patriot Act. What about McCain- Feingold? FinReg's being "too soft?" The man believes in unlimited government power — as long as it is aligned with his beliefs.

There's a trap of person X is insufficiently committed to my project Y so he is not committed to liberty. There is a rare critical mass brewing in property rights and economic liberty. Kuzncki seems disinterested.

[Deduct 15% of the aggravated tone – I am hurried but not angry.]


The internet is not the problem – as Robert Putnam has pointed out, the decline in the American community (along with its use as a vehicle for citizens to stand up against tyranny) has been on the decline for the last forty years. The internet has simply given us the illusion that we are back in control.

The PATRIOT Act is the clearest abrogation of constitutional protection to be found in the US Code. McCain-Feingold doesn't hold a candle to it. Unconstitutional – sure. But it did nothing near the damage done to American liberties by PATRIOT.

This is my trouble with the trap of person x and issue Y. Sometimes issue Y is really just more important. What use is a 'critical mass for economic liberty' when the constitution has already been gutted and the rule of law exists no more?

I doubt that McCain-Feingold is unconstitutional (the awful decision in Cit. United notwithstanding). And it's absurd to say that Feingold believes in "unlimited govt power" on the basis of his votes for health care reform and fin. reg. (2 quite modest bills).
jk apparently has little idea what "unlimited" means.