European Papers Publish Cartoons in Stand for Press Freedom - New York Times
Has the European media ever heard of the word respect? Do they have any idea that the beliefs of these Muslims they are so intent on angering are actually believed? The Muslims didn't just make up a bunch of lies and say, "Hey, this sounds good, lets do this." Islam is a religion that developed as a way to help explain the world and priovide social control. It is just as a viable, and perhaps more so, than the Europeans damnable secular beliefs. These newspapers claim this religious dogma conflicts with democracy. There is no relation! This has to do with treating fellow human beings, though they believe differently, with repsect. I could understand if this dealt with women's rights or something that had to do with society as a whole. There are things in the Muslim world that deserve criticism, just as there are in the Christian and secular worlds. This action on the part of the European newspapers, however, is criticising a religious belief that harms absolutely no one. It is a smack in the face to everyone who holds any belief, religious or not. It says that Europeans do not believe in respect for another's beliefs. They would rather have everyone keep their religious beliefs in their home. Well, why can these secularists hold their inane views up for the world to see while the religious must cower, shamed that they actually believe man is something more than a product of random chance in an uncaring universe?
The issue at stake is not freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to offend. There are certain restraints that must be conformed to for any society to survive. With the increasing numbers of Muslims in Europe, Europeans will have to change their views or they face a bloody future. They say they don't want to fight over religion. They say they want peace and acceptance for all, yet every day they express racism and intolerance towards the Muslim world. I understand that these are deep-seated prejudices that have existed for centuries, but the Europeans sure didn't have to fight too long to get over the deep-seated belief in God they once had. I'm sure they can get over the belief that their way is the best way.
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Monday, January 30, 2006
Let me paint a picture. Before a cheering crowd stands a man who sees the poverty of his people, a woman mourning the death of her son in a war she believes is unjust, and a
woman who grieves the death of her husband, who wanted independence for his country. Each of these people supports a cause. They want the U.S. to change. They want the U.S. to stop fighting foreign wars and stop interfering in foreign markets. They want the U.S. to allow other people to live the way they choose to live and accept that these people may have different values. They want peace and freedom.
But let's look a little deeper. First, the woman grieving hers husband. Though her husband did support independence, he was killed in an FBI raid. The FBI were searching for him because he stole $7.2 million from the U.S. Also, the country is Puerto Rico, a territory if the U.S.; a territory that I don't think many would consider exactly enslaved by the U.S. Now the second woman. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died as a volunteer in the military, fighting in a war to free a nation terrorized by its president and in which every intelligence agency in the world believed there were WMD. And finally, the man who claims to be fighting for the welfare of his nation. The man who is kicking out Christian missionaries, who threatens everybody who is American, whether they are good or bad, who fights against big business, taking away jobs from his people, who nationalizes industries, an economic move which has already been proven to devestate economies. A man who lies and threatens, who creates conspiracy theories to bring him sympathy, pity, and power. He is a man who seeks one thing - power at the expense of all else, even the welfare of his own people.
You can see these people as freedom fighters, who are fighting against a corrupt nation, or as villains who are spreading lies and deceit about a generally good nation. Or perhaps it is more complex than that. Maybe the people are bad, but the nation is also corrupt and they merely are feeding off that corruption. Or maybe the nation is good and these people are good and they are merely blinded by grief over the pain they see in those they love. The point is, I may be wrong.
Here is how I see it, though. Elma Beatriz Rosado was married to a criminal. He may have had good intentions, but he stole millions of dollars from the U.S. He broke the law and deserved to pay the consequence. He may have been killed before he could face trial, but I have serious doubts that the FBI shot without provocation. Cindy Sheehan is fighting not in support of her son, but against him. Rather than asking this government to structure an effective reconstruction scheme so that we can build up a nation and pull out without risking the civil war or having to return, she demands we pull out now and abandon the Iraqis to the terrorists who still have far too much control. She fights, blinded by her own grief, ignoring the fact that if we pull out now, her son's life would truly be a waste: Iraq would simply develop into a place either just as bad or worse than what it was like under Saddam.
Finally, Hugo Chavez. I do not have the words, and would not be willing to write them if I did, to describe my feelings about this man. He is truly a villaim who desires one thing: power. To get it, he plays off the unpopular actions of the U.S. He harnesses the traditional biases of the people against big business and the rich. He plays off racism: the battle between Hispanic and white Americans. To keep power and make it appear that he cares about the people, he tears apart the Venezualen economy. This man is evil. I have no doubt about this. He is doing things similar to what Hitler did in Germany. He is playing off the natural prejudices and the poverty of the people to, perfectly legally, place himself in power. The parallels are scary. In the early nineties, Chavez attempted a failed coup and was placed in jail. When he came out, he used the poverty of the people to catapult himself into elected office. Hitler attempted a coup. He was placed in jail. He came out, played off the terrible poverty of the Depression, and was elected into office. These moves do not mean Chavez is Hitler. But they may show that he thinks in a similar way. Let's not repeat history. Let's watch Chavez closely and be sure to defend the rights of his people, since so far he has not.
woman who grieves the death of her husband, who wanted independence for his country. Each of these people supports a cause. They want the U.S. to change. They want the U.S. to stop fighting foreign wars and stop interfering in foreign markets. They want the U.S. to allow other people to live the way they choose to live and accept that these people may have different values. They want peace and freedom.
But let's look a little deeper. First, the woman grieving hers husband. Though her husband did support independence, he was killed in an FBI raid. The FBI were searching for him because he stole $7.2 million from the U.S. Also, the country is Puerto Rico, a territory if the U.S.; a territory that I don't think many would consider exactly enslaved by the U.S. Now the second woman. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died as a volunteer in the military, fighting in a war to free a nation terrorized by its president and in which every intelligence agency in the world believed there were WMD. And finally, the man who claims to be fighting for the welfare of his nation. The man who is kicking out Christian missionaries, who threatens everybody who is American, whether they are good or bad, who fights against big business, taking away jobs from his people, who nationalizes industries, an economic move which has already been proven to devestate economies. A man who lies and threatens, who creates conspiracy theories to bring him sympathy, pity, and power. He is a man who seeks one thing - power at the expense of all else, even the welfare of his own people.
You can see these people as freedom fighters, who are fighting against a corrupt nation, or as villains who are spreading lies and deceit about a generally good nation. Or perhaps it is more complex than that. Maybe the people are bad, but the nation is also corrupt and they merely are feeding off that corruption. Or maybe the nation is good and these people are good and they are merely blinded by grief over the pain they see in those they love. The point is, I may be wrong.
Here is how I see it, though. Elma Beatriz Rosado was married to a criminal. He may have had good intentions, but he stole millions of dollars from the U.S. He broke the law and deserved to pay the consequence. He may have been killed before he could face trial, but I have serious doubts that the FBI shot without provocation. Cindy Sheehan is fighting not in support of her son, but against him. Rather than asking this government to structure an effective reconstruction scheme so that we can build up a nation and pull out without risking the civil war or having to return, she demands we pull out now and abandon the Iraqis to the terrorists who still have far too much control. She fights, blinded by her own grief, ignoring the fact that if we pull out now, her son's life would truly be a waste: Iraq would simply develop into a place either just as bad or worse than what it was like under Saddam.
Finally, Hugo Chavez. I do not have the words, and would not be willing to write them if I did, to describe my feelings about this man. He is truly a villaim who desires one thing: power. To get it, he plays off the unpopular actions of the U.S. He harnesses the traditional biases of the people against big business and the rich. He plays off racism: the battle between Hispanic and white Americans. To keep power and make it appear that he cares about the people, he tears apart the Venezualen economy. This man is evil. I have no doubt about this. He is doing things similar to what Hitler did in Germany. He is playing off the natural prejudices and the poverty of the people to, perfectly legally, place himself in power. The parallels are scary. In the early nineties, Chavez attempted a failed coup and was placed in jail. When he came out, he used the poverty of the people to catapult himself into elected office. Hitler attempted a coup. He was placed in jail. He came out, played off the terrible poverty of the Depression, and was elected into office. These moves do not mean Chavez is Hitler. But they may show that he thinks in a similar way. Let's not repeat history. Let's watch Chavez closely and be sure to defend the rights of his people, since so far he has not.
Saturday, January 28, 2006
Snow Angels
“If you can talk, you can sing. If you can walk, you can dance.”
-African proverb
Tonight I went to a church dance and had the time of my life. I don’t know what it is exactly that makes it so fun. It’s not like I can dance. I do the same thing over and over, just kicking my feet and swinging my arms. And I’m not a big fan of most of the music they play. In fact, outside of the dance, I usually hate to hear that stuff. Yet I’ve had more fun at dances, especially the two church dances I’ve been to up here, then I’ve had almost anywhere else. I can’t explain it.
Regardless, my ears hurt. We danced next to the speaker. How dumb can you get? Here are two speakers on top of each other, blasting loud enough to be heard clearly outside of the church, and we danced right next to them. Well, it was fun.
That’s the story of the dance.
-African proverb
Tonight I went to a church dance and had the time of my life. I don’t know what it is exactly that makes it so fun. It’s not like I can dance. I do the same thing over and over, just kicking my feet and swinging my arms. And I’m not a big fan of most of the music they play. In fact, outside of the dance, I usually hate to hear that stuff. Yet I’ve had more fun at dances, especially the two church dances I’ve been to up here, then I’ve had almost anywhere else. I can’t explain it.
Regardless, my ears hurt. We danced next to the speaker. How dumb can you get? Here are two speakers on top of each other, blasting loud enough to be heard clearly outside of the church, and we danced right next to them. Well, it was fun.
That’s the story of the dance.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Peanut M&M's
It’s been too long since I last wrote. It’s been good back at school, but a little weird. I’m still adjusting to having two different homes. I love it here, but I miss my home. When I’m home, I miss here.
Leading a life like this has some interesting effects. I’m separated from my home, family, and old friends. Suddenly, I’m in new environment, facing new challenges, and some old one. Living away from home for college makes it impossible to live the same superficial life. I can’t base me, my personality, off of my friends, family or home. I don’t have those here. No In-n-Out, no beaches, I can’t wear sandals or shorts year-round. I spend time with people who are very different and have different interests from my old friends. Relationships take on a new character. No relationship here can take the place of the ones I had back home, the ones that helped me define who I was. Suddenly, the that was my life is taken away. Now what? Do I develop a new shell?
I started to. Then I went home for Christmas. What happened there? The new, still fragile shell cracked. It didn’t hold up. I couldn’t figure it out. Who am I, exactly? It’s really not an easy question. But having two homes has helped me answer that question
Living in two homes, as I already said, makes it difficult to live in a shell. Each time I move from one home to the other, the shell cracks and is stripped away. What is revealed each time is the person I truly am. That is the great benefit of living away from home, of traveling and experiencing the world. I am able to define myself by what I am inside, but what I consistently do wherever I am, rather than by what I wear, who I spend time with, or where I hang out. Suddenly, the importance of truly knowing who you are is apparent. If I didn’t know who I was, what would I do? I would seek out things that don’t matter. I would search for what I had before and always be disappointed because I can’t find it. But now that won’t happen. Though the journey is nowhere near over, I have come to this realization. I have made the first step.
I know who I am. I am a child of God. I am a divine being, here on this earth, learning all I can so I can return back to my Heavenly Father and, if I live the way he has asked, inherit all he has. That truth provides me with a basis on which I can always act, no matter where I am. Wherever I am, I will seek out the way I can serve him best. Here, it is in class, learning of the universe he has created, and being a friend to those around me. This gives a purpose to my life; a purpose that is greater and deeper than getting the best grades or having the most fun possible or being popular or doing the best in video games. Though at times each of these concerns may cloud my mind and distract me, my understanding of who I am is at the root of my being, and it shines with a light that pierces through all the mists of darkness that stop me from finding my way.
If I were all alone, in a new, unfamiliar place, without a friend, without the ability to do well in school, without the wealth that allows me to sit in privacy and type this entry, I would still have this truth. I am still a child of God and he has a task for me, wherever I am, and I will fulfill it. This is there core around which I build my shell and no matter what happens to the shell, that core will remain and guide me through all my life.
Leading a life like this has some interesting effects. I’m separated from my home, family, and old friends. Suddenly, I’m in new environment, facing new challenges, and some old one. Living away from home for college makes it impossible to live the same superficial life. I can’t base me, my personality, off of my friends, family or home. I don’t have those here. No In-n-Out, no beaches, I can’t wear sandals or shorts year-round. I spend time with people who are very different and have different interests from my old friends. Relationships take on a new character. No relationship here can take the place of the ones I had back home, the ones that helped me define who I was. Suddenly, the that was my life is taken away. Now what? Do I develop a new shell?
I started to. Then I went home for Christmas. What happened there? The new, still fragile shell cracked. It didn’t hold up. I couldn’t figure it out. Who am I, exactly? It’s really not an easy question. But having two homes has helped me answer that question
Living in two homes, as I already said, makes it difficult to live in a shell. Each time I move from one home to the other, the shell cracks and is stripped away. What is revealed each time is the person I truly am. That is the great benefit of living away from home, of traveling and experiencing the world. I am able to define myself by what I am inside, but what I consistently do wherever I am, rather than by what I wear, who I spend time with, or where I hang out. Suddenly, the importance of truly knowing who you are is apparent. If I didn’t know who I was, what would I do? I would seek out things that don’t matter. I would search for what I had before and always be disappointed because I can’t find it. But now that won’t happen. Though the journey is nowhere near over, I have come to this realization. I have made the first step.
I know who I am. I am a child of God. I am a divine being, here on this earth, learning all I can so I can return back to my Heavenly Father and, if I live the way he has asked, inherit all he has. That truth provides me with a basis on which I can always act, no matter where I am. Wherever I am, I will seek out the way I can serve him best. Here, it is in class, learning of the universe he has created, and being a friend to those around me. This gives a purpose to my life; a purpose that is greater and deeper than getting the best grades or having the most fun possible or being popular or doing the best in video games. Though at times each of these concerns may cloud my mind and distract me, my understanding of who I am is at the root of my being, and it shines with a light that pierces through all the mists of darkness that stop me from finding my way.
If I were all alone, in a new, unfamiliar place, without a friend, without the ability to do well in school, without the wealth that allows me to sit in privacy and type this entry, I would still have this truth. I am still a child of God and he has a task for me, wherever I am, and I will fulfill it. This is there core around which I build my shell and no matter what happens to the shell, that core will remain and guide me through all my life.
Sunday, January 08, 2006
Time to get back to blogging again. I took quite a break there. I hope somebody out there is willing to read this still.
Calvin and Hobbes commentary on TV is right in line with what I think. In case I haven't said it enough, I love this comic strip! Actually, I got the Complete Calvin and Hobbes for Christmas. What can I say, I'm obsessed.
Calvin and Hobbes commentary on TV is right in line with what I think. In case I haven't said it enough, I love this comic strip! Actually, I got the Complete Calvin and Hobbes for Christmas. What can I say, I'm obsessed.
Friday, December 02, 2005
McCarthyism
The world can be a scary place, especially after reading this essay Orson Scott Card writes about journalists who are lying to us. Flat out lying. Really, a lot of this isn't terribly surprising. The French press lied about Israel. Well, they hate Israel, so that's understandable. The same for the Palestinians who staged the murder. And the fact that an American reporter twisted a quote to serve his purpose isn't surprising. but being presented with this concrete evidence and having the consequences laid out before you is scary. It's easy to just put it off when you're reading the newspaper. But Card has pieced it all together and opened my eyes to the implications. The press can destroy lives with the power they have. That is scary.
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
"It does not respond to what the American people want." - Senator Kennedy
What's more important senator? What people want or what is right? Are you such a slave to public opinion that you will abandon millions to civil war and terrorism simply because some wealthy, ignorant Americans don't see the light? It seems so.
Victory, Mr. President? - Independent
What's more important senator? What people want or what is right? Are you such a slave to public opinion that you will abandon millions to civil war and terrorism simply because some wealthy, ignorant Americans don't see the light? It seems so.
Victory, Mr. President? - Independent
Pull out?
All those who want to pull out of Iraq now seem to want one thing: to protect their own hides. How is pulling out going to help the Iraqis? Didn’t the mosque bombing clue them in? These terrorists aren’t fighting a war against America. They are fighting a war against any form of freedom; freedom which the Shiites currently support; freedom that has taken power away from the minority Sunnis. And it’s not even the Sunnis. It’s a small faction within the Sunnis, combined with foreign terrorists. These are the killers in Iraq.
The fact is, no war is won by setting an end date. Every war is won by setting a goal, no matter the time or cost involved. Our goal should be a stable and democratic Iraq. This is Bush’s goal. The Democratic goal seems to be to beat Bush and the Republicans. I know no one is innocent here. There are lies, scandals, and partisan politics on all sides, but if I put that behind me and think of the Iraqis, I wonder what choice we have. Will we let petty politics condemn these people to losing their chance at freedom? Getting our troops out is a bad objective, if it simply means setting a timetable. It is a wonderful objective if it means making the war more effective by uniting behind the cause of a stable and democratic Iraq. It will require time, money, and, worst of all, lives. But freedom has always required lives. This should not shock anyone. It is hard, it is undesireable, but is unavoidable.
Forget the past for now. Finish the war. Unite and do what it takes to rid Iraq of the insurgency and allow our troops to leave the country. Then, and only then, when Iraq is stable and our troops are back home, should we look back and say, what can we learn from this? Doing it now is distracting us, diverting resources and support, and will drag us down in the end. I am not against questioning our government. I am against questioning our government at times when it will hinder such a delicate and vital process.
The fact is, no war is won by setting an end date. Every war is won by setting a goal, no matter the time or cost involved. Our goal should be a stable and democratic Iraq. This is Bush’s goal. The Democratic goal seems to be to beat Bush and the Republicans. I know no one is innocent here. There are lies, scandals, and partisan politics on all sides, but if I put that behind me and think of the Iraqis, I wonder what choice we have. Will we let petty politics condemn these people to losing their chance at freedom? Getting our troops out is a bad objective, if it simply means setting a timetable. It is a wonderful objective if it means making the war more effective by uniting behind the cause of a stable and democratic Iraq. It will require time, money, and, worst of all, lives. But freedom has always required lives. This should not shock anyone. It is hard, it is undesireable, but is unavoidable.
Forget the past for now. Finish the war. Unite and do what it takes to rid Iraq of the insurgency and allow our troops to leave the country. Then, and only then, when Iraq is stable and our troops are back home, should we look back and say, what can we learn from this? Doing it now is distracting us, diverting resources and support, and will drag us down in the end. I am not against questioning our government. I am against questioning our government at times when it will hinder such a delicate and vital process.
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Guys with Heart
Check out Café Hayek. After reading just a few of their posts, I’ve found that they are smart men. And they aren’t just smart, they care about people. They aren’t political for the sake of argument. It seems that they really want what they say to make a difference in this world. Check it out. The link will permanently be in the sidebar.
Rational War
Sunk costs are irrelevant. This is a significant part of economics. It means that decisions made in the past should not affect decisions made now because you cannot change those decisions. What matters is the consequence of the decision that will be made now. So, if I am deciding on whether to write this post or do my homework, the fact that I chose to play computer games yesterday instead of doing homework shouldn’t affect my decision. Yes, the fact that I didn’t do homework yesterday means I have more homework to do today, but the fact that I chose to play computer games yesterday does not weigh into my decision today. The only things I consider are the importance of doing my homework now versus the importance of writing this post.
You’re probably wondering what I’m babbling on about. Well, I am saying that sunk costs are irrelevant and this applies not only in my private decisions, but also in the national and international arena. Many Democrats are calling for a set date to pull out of Iaq. They attack Bush on the muddled reasoning for invading the country. These two issues have nothing to do with each other. Whether or not we were justified in entering Iraq, the fact is, we are there and this country depends on us if it is to rise out of this mess without falling into civil war. Joe Leiberman wrote an excellent editorial regarding this subject. We are in Iraq and have an opportunity to save millions from tyranny. We are a nation founded upon this principle of freedom and we must unite to support it. We have made mistakes in Iraq. We made mistakes in every war, though. Our government and military are man-made institutions. If we look for flaws, we will find them every time. If we concentrate on those flaws, we will miss this opportunity and these people will once again lose hope.
Pulling out of Iraq is not an option. Yes, it will save our lives, but it will condemn millions to a life they have a chance to leave behind forever. If we back down from this challenge out of our own selfishness and pride, the blood of those people will be answered upon our own heads. Every life has a cost, but when that life is lost in fighting for freedom, than that life is not lost in vain. I salute the thousands of U.S. soldiers who have died in Iraq, attempting to bring one of the most precious of American ideals to a foreign land – freedom.
You’re probably wondering what I’m babbling on about. Well, I am saying that sunk costs are irrelevant and this applies not only in my private decisions, but also in the national and international arena. Many Democrats are calling for a set date to pull out of Iaq. They attack Bush on the muddled reasoning for invading the country. These two issues have nothing to do with each other. Whether or not we were justified in entering Iraq, the fact is, we are there and this country depends on us if it is to rise out of this mess without falling into civil war. Joe Leiberman wrote an excellent editorial regarding this subject. We are in Iraq and have an opportunity to save millions from tyranny. We are a nation founded upon this principle of freedom and we must unite to support it. We have made mistakes in Iraq. We made mistakes in every war, though. Our government and military are man-made institutions. If we look for flaws, we will find them every time. If we concentrate on those flaws, we will miss this opportunity and these people will once again lose hope.
Pulling out of Iraq is not an option. Yes, it will save our lives, but it will condemn millions to a life they have a chance to leave behind forever. If we back down from this challenge out of our own selfishness and pride, the blood of those people will be answered upon our own heads. Every life has a cost, but when that life is lost in fighting for freedom, than that life is not lost in vain. I salute the thousands of U.S. soldiers who have died in Iraq, attempting to bring one of the most precious of American ideals to a foreign land – freedom.
Thursday, November 17, 2005
The Sombrero Galaxy. Funny name, but this picture (it is an actual picture taken by the Hubble Space Telescope), stirs deep emotions within me. It is a picture of an object to immense and so distant, it is beyond imagining. And it is beautiful. Within it a billions of stars and wonders that we can hardly imagine. Perhaps there are planets within with life, with intelligent life. WHat is in the depths of that galaxy? I'll probably not know in this lifetime.
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
Victory! For Now...
We did it! The US is retaining control of the internet. A forum has been set up for world governments to have their say, which will ease some pressure, but not much. People tend not to like to just say words. They want to have control. Understandable. Having the interent so heavily dominated by the U.S. does make it difficult for those who don't speak English, but this isn't because of our government. It is because the internet grew up here. Of course we influence it heavily. Of course other languages are less common. The only thing stopping these other languages from becoming common on the internet is the fact that people that speak other languages haven't started using it. If the tools are provided, these languages will become common because businesses will find it more profitable to use the internet. As they begin using, they will innovate and discover ways to make it easier to use their language on the internet. We need time, not some international government agency to force it to happen. If world governments provide the freedom for businesses to operate on the internet, the growth will occur and this amazing tool will become the multilateral network they want it to be. Be patient!
Tuesday, November 08, 2005
Capitalism
I am a capitalist. I support free-markets as the best way to manage the economy. So what? I have been reading some scary things in the news lately coming from socialists and those who believe government can best manage the economy. Let me begin.
Riots
The story begins in Paris. Two weeks ago, two boys were electrocuted in a Paris suburb. Since then, there have been constant riots in the Parisian suburbs and they have spread throughout the country. Why would the death of these two boys spark such chaos? I believe it has a great deal to do with economics. Joel Kotkin, writing for the Wall Street Journal, provides the evidence for this argument. France's socialism, and Europe's in general, is strangling its immigrants. In the suburbs where these riots are occuring, the homes of a large portion of France's immigrants, unemployment looms around 40%. No wonder they are rioting. Though they are only hurting their cause, they are a frustrated people who have found no help from a prejudiced and selfish nation.
Multilateralism?
The next danger has to do with the medium through which I am communicating. Perhaps the greatest miracle of communication, the internet, faces a danger that threatens to destroy its vitality and openness. There has been a proposal made for the UN to govern the internet. This is dangerous. I support Mr. Coleman's view in this editorial that giving control of this powerful tool to an organization which is being heavliy influenced by those who stand to lose from a free internet is a stupid idea.
The argument is that the internet is influenced too heavliy by the US. I would have to agree that it is heavily influenced by the US, but that is changing and will continue to change as the internet grows. Currently, the US government has little control over the internet. The majority of the internet is controled by private firms. This means that private firms from anywhere can have a say in governing the internet.
Is this happening? Not yet. A communications tool that grew to maturity in a country will be heavily influenced by that country and the companies that fostered this growth. As the internet spreads, however, companies in other countries are and will continue to enter the markets that shape the internet, giving the international community a say in how it works.
Handing the internet over to a bureau is asking for politicization of the internet. If it happens, we will probably watch the internet become a tool for the various governments as they regulate out what they don't like and regulate in the propaganda that support their actions.
The Heir Apparant
We may never be rid of the lies of communism. Just as China begins opening up to capitalism and as we wait for Castro to die, Castro's ideological heir rises up in Venezuela. Hugo Chavez supports the same communist lies that caused the economic ruin of Soviet Russia, China, North Korea, and virtually every country that has tried it before. He is tearing his country apart, destroying the only hope it has for economic progress. Yet his people believe in him. Why? For the same reason they follow any revolutionary demagogue: he provides new and different lies. There is hope in his words. Capitalism, for whatever reason, hasn't worked in South America. Rather than propose solutions, Chavez is successfully diverting the people's anger towards the wealthy and successful. Rather than encourage them to work hard and publicly discuss solutions to Venezuela's and South America's woes, he offers a seemingly quick and easy path to prosperity. Just as for anything worthwhile, there is no quick and easy way. Economic progress, except for notable exceptions, is slow and steady. As Chavez diverts his people's attention from markets and working to achieve prosperity, he will drive the economy into the ground. Look forward to yet another starving and struggling country.
The Answer
I do not believe markets hold all the solutions. Markets can be just as dangerous and devestating to people as the government. And the government is needed to make up for the market-system's shortcomings. But in all these cases, people want to rely heavily on the government. This strategy will not succeed. The combination of the market and a limited government, as the US and other market driven economies have substantially proven, brings economic growth and prosperity. It leads to efficiency and innovation such as the internet. Turning towards government places your freedom to act in the hands of fallible human beings. Be wary of the government and the attempts around the globe to extend its powers. I support capitalism and my freedom to choose how my life will be. I have no desire to place that power in the hands of a government.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)