Last week, I outlined much of my argument against Harvard Law School professor Elizabeth Bartholet that I incorporated into our debate, but here are five takeaways from Monday’s discussion.
Tag: rights
Rioting is Wrong Way to Protest
There’s a correct way to protest injustice and there’s a wrong way. You may have recently noticed people in several big cities doing it the wrong way. Although, perhaps people pretending to side with the protesters were intentionally making the protesters look bad — it’s hard to know which.
Your Autonomous Zone
Your home is your autonomous zone; your castle. Never forget it. How you choose to act on this knowledge is your business.
Todd Winn’s “Defense of Human Rights” Review (16m) – Episode 302
Episode 302 has Skyler reading and adding commentary on “In Defense of Human Rights: An Open Letter”, written by Marine Veteran Todd Winn in June 2020.
Police Violence: “Reform” Is Not Enough
Every few years, some particular instance of a pervasive phenomenon — police violence in the form of unjustified or at least highly questionable killings — “goes viral” with the result that America’s cities explode in protest. Every time that happens, some American politicians complain about a non-existent “war on police,” while others promise “reforms” such as closer supervision (like the increase in body camera use following the 2014 killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri), civilian review boards to investigate complaints, better training, and of course more money. After each round of “reforms,” the problem continues.
Censorship is a Loser Move
Censorship is running rampant, but I’ve seen people argue that it’s not censorship unless government is doing it. That’s not correct. Censorship doesn’t only refer to government action.
Hate Speech, Property Destruction, Demonization, & Natural Rights (27m) – Episode 298
Episode 298 has Skyler giving his commentary on the following entries to r/shitstatistssay: zarthrag writes, “Hate, and any of its manifestations is against the NAP. Hate speech isn’t just speech, it’s a form of aggression”; ShambhalaOrangeJuice writes, “People have a right to destroy chain buildings… because that is a part of the establishment which has oppressed them without respite”; CTR555 writes, “As far as I’m concerned, there are two types of people in America: people who vote for the Democratic nominee, and bad people”; and JimJam28 writes, “I don’t believe there is a ‘creator’ who endowed us with rights. There are no rights in nature. We decide as a society what rights should exist and how to properly protect those rights.”
Reflections on the Krikorian-Caplan Soho Forum Debate
Thanks again to Gene Epstein and Reason for sponsoring last week’s immigration debate between myself and Mark Krikorian. Thanks to Mark, too, for debating before an unsympathetic audience. The resolution, you may recall, was: The current pandemic makes it all the more necessary for the federal government to tighten restrictions on immigration. Here are my extra thoughts on the exchange.
Failing in a Crisis – And All The Time
Government-supremacists are desperately trying to interpret government’s actions during the pandemic in such a way to make them seem smart– or at least honest. And they are failing. Hard.
Harvard Magazine Calls for a “Presumptive Ban” on Homeschooling: Here Are 5 Things It Got Wrong
As a Harvard alum, longtime donor, education researcher, and homeschooling mother of four children in Cambridge, Massachusetts, I was shocked to read the article, “The Risks of Homeschooling,” by Erin O’Donnell in Harvard Magazine’s new May-June 2020 issue. Aside from its biting, one-sided portrayal of homeschooling families that mischaracterizes the vast majority of today’s homeschoolers, it is filled with misinformation and incorrect data. Here are five key points that challenge the article’s primary claim that the alleged “risks for children—and society—in homeschooling” necessitate a “presumptive ban on the practice”.