Category Archives: Political Commentary

Philosophy, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Technology and Society, Weird

Adaptation

March 13, 2012 Rand Simberg 1 Comment

Some have said that the cost-effective solution to climate change is to adapt (I’m in this camp). But I think this may be going overboard:

Some of the proposed modifications are simple and noninvasive. For instance, many people wish to give up meat for ecological reasons, but lack the willpower to do so on their own. The paper suggests that such individuals could take a pill that would trigger mild nausea upon the ingestion of meat, which would then lead to a lasting aversion to meat-eating. Other techniques are bound to be more controversial. For instance, the paper suggests that parents could make use of genetic engineering or hormone therapy in order to birth smaller, less resource-intensive children.

What could go wrong?

And of course, it’s all about the liberty:

It’s been suggested that, given the seriousness of climate change, we ought to adopt something like China’s one child policy. There was a group of doctors in Britain who recently advocated a two-child maximum. But at the end of the day those are crude prescriptions—what we really care about is some kind of fixed allocation of greenhouse gas emissions per family. If that’s the case, given certain fixed allocations of greenhouse gas emissions, human engineering could give families the choice between two medium sized children, or three small sized children. From our perspective that would be more liberty enhancing than a policy that says “you can only have one or two children.” A family might want a really good basketball player, and so they could use human engineering to have one really large child.

Yes, that’s what we really care about — a fixed allocation of greenhouse emissions per family.

More thoughts from Mark Wilson at Ricochet.

Humor, Media Criticism, Political Commentary

The Heart Of Darkness

March 13, 2012 Rand Simberg

Mark Steyn, on his upcoming excursion of danger into the wilds of the Great White North.

Education, Media Criticism, Political Commentary

Anybody But Obama

March 13, 2012 Rand Simberg 4 Comments

Despite the hopes of the foolish, the Tea Party hasn’t gone away:

“When it comes to the presidential contest, I think the tea partiers will turn up in droves,” she told The Daily Caller.

“They aren’t rallying in the street anymore — I think they’ve been there, done that, so they appear to be quieter. But tea party chapters are still alive and vigorous, and they are just chomping at the bit to pull a lever in November.”

What’s more, says Foley, is that tea partiers will ultimately rally behind whomever the GOP nominee turns out to be.

“And frankly, I think many tea partiers are eager to pull the lever in favor of the Republican presidential nominee — whoever that turns out to be — simply because, from their perspective, that person’s policies will be clearly preferable to those of President Obama,” she said.

And then there’s this:

Foley is the rarest of species: a tea party supporter in liberal academia. A law professor at Florida International University and chair in constitutional litigation for the Institute of Justice, Foley says many of her liberal colleagues didn’t receive her pro-tea party book too well. (RELATED: Full coverage of the tea party movement)

“It’s more than a little ironic that some of the most close-minded folks I have ever met make their living as professors whose entire job is to engage in scholarly inquiry and convey that spirit of open-minded inquiry to their students,” she said. “It never ceases to amaze and disappoint me.”

I’m long past either amazement or disappointment. They can do neither any more.

[Update a few minutes later]

Here’s a review of Foley’s book, which explains the Tea Party to the idiots in the media.

Business, Economics, Political Commentary, Space

EELV And The Launch-Cost Problem

March 12, 2012 Rand Simberg 4 Comments

A very good overview of the current state of affairs by Stewart Money over at The Space Review. It’s a mess, and it’s not going to change until we start to take more COTS-like approaches throughout, not just for NASA but DoD as well.

Mathematics, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Technology and Society

Angry Birds

March 12, 2012 Rand Simberg 2 Comments

How the physics works.

Political Commentary, Popular Culture, Satire

Zombie Mitt Romney?

March 12, 2012 Rand Simberg 5 Comments

An interesting allegory.

History, Media Criticism, Philosophy, Political Commentary

The True Meaning Of The Killing Fields

March 12, 2012 Rand Simberg 11 Comments

Some questions about Cambodia:

…what happened in Cambodia is what happened in the French Revolution, and in Stalin’s purges and mass collectivization campaigns, and in Mao’s Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, only on a proportionately larger scale. It was mass murder in the name of equality. It wasn’t “genocide”; it was Communist utopianism carried to its logical extreme. The Khmer Rouge, who called themselves Maoists, believed that the most important social and political value was equality and that in order to create their new, classless society in which everyone was equal, it was necessary to exterminate anyone who might be smarter, or better educated, or wealthier, or more talented than anyone else. Thus, they killed the educated, the bourgeoisie, the middle classes, and the rich; movie stars, pop singers, authors, urban residents, and workers for the former government; and anyone who protested — as well as the families of all the above. Towards the end, they also killed cadres who were thought to be a political threat. Whatever their crimes were, the Khmer Rouge do not seem to have been motivated by racial, ethnic, or religious hatred.

Why then do Cambodians and the world call the mass murders by the Khmer Rouge “genocide”? I can think of several possible reasons. One is the superficial similarity to other mass slaughters — as noted earlier, the pictures of the Cambodian killing fields look very much like the pictures from the German concentration camps. Surely many people who are largely ignorant of history know only that similarity. Another reason is the fact that the victims of genocide are sympathetic. The U.N. creates commissions, and wealthy countries send money. Cambodia today is filled with NGOs bringing aid of various kinds. The desire for international sympathy might explain why Cambodians use the genocide label.

However, I suspect that the most important reason for the usage worldwide is that many people in the international media, international agencies, and international NGOs (not to mention academia) are reluctant to face up to the crimes committed by Communism in the name of equality. To do so might call into question the weight attached by them to equality as the most important social value and undermine the multicultural faith that evil is predominantly the product of inequality, racism, ethnic hatred, or religious fanaticism. That cannot be permitted, so such crimes must be either ignored or mislabeled. And, of course, the remaining Communist regimes in the world are only too happy to cooperate in characterizing the killing fields as the products of irrational paranoia on the part of Pol Pot and his gang rather than the perfectly rational result of the quest for perfect equality.

It’s useful to remember (or to be aware, if one wasn’t) that Pol Pot was educated (so to speak) in Paris. That was where he was radicalized, another child of the malignant Rousseau.

And when you hear some of the hate and misanthropy coming from the American Left (and too many of the Watermelon Greens), it could easily happen here as well, if they ever are given the power they crave. Particularly if they ever achieve their ongoing goal of disarming the people.

Transterrestrial Musings