For some time now, I’ve had an item for sale online. It’s an antique tractor seat, forged about a century ago in nearby Hoosick, New York, and various collectors prize these particular kind – though they generally don’t fetch much at market. Mine’s priced well above the going rate, and that’s quite deliberate: If someone wants it badly enough, and is willing to pay extra, I’ll part with it.
Conservatives apparently imagine that if you just got the “right kind” of politicians holding the leashes of the police that the police would turn into the heroic saviors the conservatives seem to want so badly for them to be. Nope. That will never happen. Good people don’t seek a job that gives them that kind of power over others. Not politics or policing.
Overall, reactions to The Case Against Education have been civil and fair. While I’ve been heavily criticized, I’ve been criticized for what I actually said and believe. My main disappointment: While the quality of the left-wing critiques has been fine, the quantity is modest.
Declining to participate in a government extremist ritual isn’t much of a “protest” if you ask me. Especially since kneeling instead of standing and repeating the chant is still participating. It doesn’t even approach what I would consider a protest. But nationalists are easily triggered.
The left doesn’t have principles, they have narratives. They only stand up for principles when it serves their narrative. This isn’t a new phenomenon either. The left’s primary narrative is that there are some scary powerful people maliciously oppressing victims.
The Back Story 009 wonders if leftists such as progressives and Democrats are actually liberal in their ideas.
Since the election, several people have privately asked me, “Well, whatever you think about Trump, don’t you at least enjoy the attendant outrage of the left? At least that must make you happy, right?” Don’t I want to see them choke on their own rage? Not at all.
Who knows what housing, stores, railways or other benefits to society Scrooge had made possible through his wise judgment? How many thousands of jobs had he created? Dickens is unjustly silent on this. Whatever Scrooge had financed, we know it was something the public wanted or needed enough to pay for voluntarily. Thanks to Scrooge, however crusty his demeanor, the common people of London were far richer than they otherwise would have been without his services.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t care for work either, other than writing the occasional obscure blog post, but with a preferred property rule centered on the idea that they may take what belongs to others, that would seem to suggest a major opposition to working themselves for the resources they need.
For some it’s ethical, for others it’s consequential, but the preferred property rule of all leftists, from the government-loving social democrats and progressives to the anti-state anarcho-communists (et al), seems to me (and I could be wrong) to be that if you need something that someone else has (and doesn’t need), you should get it, by any means necessary.