You can find my WishList here, and then send all sorts of presents directly to me!

So what are you waiting for?

A MAN has been found guilty of manslaughter over the death of Peter Savage, 16 years after the schoolboy was killed while walking home from school.

Peter was 16 when he was stabbed on Mills Street, Lidcombe, in August 1995 after refusing to hand his wallet to two teenagers who confronted him as he walked home after rugby training.

The case remained unsolved for more than 10 years until a childhood friend of one of the killers came forward to police in 2006, sparking an undercover police operation that brought a 33-year-old man to trial last month.

It is difficult to express in words the acute sense of sorrow – indeed heartache – I feel in the knowledge that, in all probability, the next time I go online and open my browser, I shall be confronted with my default page opening up and showing either a “page not found”, or a redirection to the interface of the wildly unpopular Google Plus.

The decision by Google to effectively destroy Google Reader, without any consultation with its loyal and dedicated userbase, is a significant blow to me, on so many levels, and I wanted to take this opportunity to explain just why it is important enough for me to have been spamming facebook with news of it, and even helping arrange for a protest outside Google DC’s office.

I have previously mentioned how vital Google Reader is to my political activities – and this is certainly true; I genuinely do not know how I shall be able to keep much of the advocacy I do at the same level of effectiveness without it – specifically, without the functions that are being destroyed in the transition to Google Plus. To call it vital would be an understatement. But there is a lot more to it than that.

To me Google Reader was always so much more than a tool to receive news and information: it was a social network beyond par that was a significant part of my life, and that I shall miss deeply.

In contrast to the facile commentary that dominates facebook, or the flippancy of twitter, it was a forum for discussion, for the cultivation of ideas and where you could deeply get to know members of your community in ways that other social networks made physically impossible. The degree of camaraderie it inspired and fostered, the intimacy it necessitated, the manner in which it was like being in a room talking with all your closest friends from around the world  at the same time, the organic development of idiosyncratic little in jokes in different groups, the petty joke squabbling, and all the tactics I satarised some time ago that made up the race to “win” google reader” – these were all things that became such an important part of my life. It is no coincidence the number of close friends I have that developed through Google Reader. And how close they all are to me.

And this, at its core, it what I shall miss the most. The friendship and the intimacy. The things I learned from people, and how it influenced me and changed me as a person (and make no mistake: google reader really has impacted upon the evolution of my political beliefs for starters, but I also my character as a whole), and these are things that shall not be able to occur anymore. Even the minor things – the little jokes (watching Team BEAR! longstanding squabbles with upstarts perhaps being the most longstanding one I’d had the pleasure to both observe from the outside and occasionally mock) – had the opportunity to brighten up my day, and put a smile on my face. It was certainly not a substitute for a social life, but it was a damn good complement to one.

And, to twist the knife in deeper, there is the fact that I am convinced that without Reader I would be not so fortunate as to be dating the brilliant and wonderful girl that I am. It is like finding that the special romantic place whose memories you cherish deeply is being  torn down and destroyed and replaced with a car park.

There is no doubt that this comes across as overly melodramatic to an outsider, but I can not deny just how utterly devastated I am by this, how much I relied on it in my social life, and how much a gaping void has appeared in my life that I do not know how to fill.

Vale Google Reader, you were killed long before your prime.

This is an extended version of an article initially published on Menzies House. I would strongly recommend everyone just read that  article,  and not the one posted here, as this version is rather long-winded and rather ranty!

To provide a bit of comic relief to our readers, I thought I would let you all know that,  in response to Menzies House’s efforts to stand up for Australian families and oppose the Federal Governments unnecessary and economically damaging tax hike, a group of bitter radical leftists decided to launch a facebook hate-page to “Alert Australians about the Agenda of the Administrator of the Original *stop the levy* page. He is a strident member of the religious right living in the USA, and an advocate for the Tea Party Movement within Australia.”

This was, of course, rather of news to us:; Menzies House being administered primarily by Chris Browne, who lives in Adelaide, and the other Admin on the Stop The Levy site, John Humphreys, himself had his house destroyed in the Queensland flooding (although they initially actually claimed he was an imposter and refused to accept this). As for me, I freely admit that I live in the U.S. for the time being (hardly an expose, you would think, as it is plainly listed on the MH website), and, of course, despite my personal religious beliefs, as an ideological classical liberal, as anyone who has read more than one piece by me would be aware, I can hardly be classified as “religious-right”, nor do I have any links to the Australian Tea Party Movement whatsoever. (The website, in a spectacular example of left-wing logic, also put two and two together, and ended up with 17, claiming claimed I renounced my Australian citizenship (I didn’t) and swore an oath of allegiance to the U.S. (also untrue – my dual-citizenship is simply due to my father being American, and have had it from birth.))

There are deeper issues at hand here, though, than the simple mouthing off of a few disgruntled leftists, which I shall go into in greater detail later in this piece, but, just to provide the background as to who exactly we are dealing with, you ought be aware that almost all of the comments on their website consists of little more than juvenile self-congratulatory gutter attempts at toilet humour (seriously, how many times can you chuckle about  “Koch-suckers” (referring to the philanthropic activities of the CG Koch Charitable Foundation) before it gets old? (also, laughingly, they claimed Menzies House receives secret Koch money – I wish!), and attacking my physical appearance (which, I concede, is probably a fair point, my modelling career has gone rather rapidly downhill considerably since I won Baby of The Year – I peaked too soon! ). And, of course, there are the death threats.

Now, due to the family-friendly nature of this site, I shall not begin to catalogue the vitriol and abuse poured our way by members of this page. With that being said, at the adamant insistence of one of their members, a Mr. Jonathon Ring, I am instructed to pass on the message that  apparently we are “heartless scumbags, mental midgets, f**lheads, dips**ts, spoons, tubes, tools, d**kheads, a***holes and c**ks.” Which is rather charming (John Humphreys – again at their request – did compile a slightly more comprehensive anthology of “the left-wing definition of polite”, which you can read here). Personally, I support their right to freedom of speech, because not only is free speech a bedrock of our free society, it also gives me great mirth, and besides, I follow Oscar Wilde’s prescription to always forgive your enemies, as “nothing annoys them so much”! Besides, I certainly do support their right to freedom of speech, and it gives me great mirth!

What is interesting, however, is the fact that in the last few days they have directed their bile at the U.S. Tea Party movement, a term used to describe a decentralised grassroots movement comprising several thousand independent local organisations, united around reducing the size and scope of government, through eliminating wasteful spending and opposing unnecessary tax hikes. From my perspective, my only real involvement with Tea Parties was attending (more observing really) a rally on September 12, 2008. Where I saw hundreds of thousands of ordinary citizens come out and oppose bad economic policies. And, like David Boaz from the libertarian Cato Institute, I came to the conclusion that, you know, these Tea Party’s were ultimately a force for good (if you want further information, here’s a good clip of my former boss, Grover Norquist, analysing the Tea Parties on Lateline with Leah Sales). Getting everyday, ordinary people engaged in the political process, to oppose bad economic policy was a great step forward for civil engagement, and I thoroughly support this. So, I am more than happy to identify, in spirit, with the Tea Party movement, and to support their small government aims, as I think most of our readers ought.

This vitriol was running through the back of my mind, when I saw this clip, filled by Ann McElhinney of Greener Horizon Films, producer of the expose on the true close of Global Warming hysteria, Not Evil Just Wrong (full disclosure, I previously worked for Greener Horizon Films as the  Australia-NZ representatives for NEJW):

You would think such foolishness a parody, if it wasn’t  for the fact that these are the exact same views espoused by the left in Australia. In all seriousness. Indeed,  Upon watching this, I immediately thought of the abuse by representatives of the hate-site, and in particularly, this message that seems to underpin all their work: “This right-wing American style of politics needs to be shut down in Australia and only you the public can stop it.”

Ahh, the left. Free speech for everyone, except if you disagree with them.

Now, personally, I find their page  hilarious, and I can’t stop laughing anytime I see it; heck, I frequently visit the site just to get a bit of a laugh whenever my day gets too stressful. Yet, beneath the humour that is the pathetically pitiful nature of their bitter obsession (and it can only be called an obsession), is a far darker point to be made. Because lurking beneath their abuse is a hatred of Australians, and a fear and desperation.

As we have explained, the tea party movement is simply ordinary people expressing their belief in small government, so, why all the hate? Indeed, as someone who believes in grassroots empowerment, in getting as many people involved in the political process as possible, and in creating a strong and dynamic civil society, this call to “stop” freedom of speech, is something I find baffling.

The only explanation I can think of for these calls, the only explanation I can find for the hate-filled smears of the left, is that they are terrified of the people. There is a real, palatable of Australians getting engaged in the political process, and this scares the hard-left witless.

Why? Simple. Because the multi-billion dollar left-wing industry relies on a quiet populace.  The millions they receive, whether it be to their NGO’s, to Unions, or even – yes, I’ll say it – to their media arm, the ABC, is reliant upon the Australian people being docile. And I think it’s time for us to be frank about this fact. There really is a multi-billion dollar far-left industry out there, reliant upon our taxpayer, and I am sick of tip-toeing around the issue for fear of alienating a special interest group.

Whether it be fat cat public ‘servant” bureaucrats, safe and secure in their tenure, knowing they will never be able to get a non-taxpayer funded job in the real world. Or so-called “climate scientists”, who, without millions in funds for scaremongering would face the unemployment queue. Those reliant on sustaining a culture of welfare, so they can keep on leeching off the public purse, “helping” the less fortunate, despite all the evidence that their big-government plans never have worked. The artsy types, who live off taxpayer dollars to propagate their hate – sorry, “art”.  “Multicultural organisations”, the ABC, Unions – the list goes on – I am only just scratching the surface. Australia has entire left wing industry entrenched through all levels of government, that up until now has never been challenged. And ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

Sure, not everyone in these professions is guilty. Most are probably hard working, diligent, good people. But I direct this to the top levels of their hierarchy, those who are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer funds a year, and, if anyone dares to tell me with a straight face they don’t have their snouts in the trough, I’d tell you that no, they don’t only have their snouts in it – they have their two front trotters as well!

If Big Left really were unashamed of their actions, they would welcome debate. They would welcome Australians getting involved in their civic duty and taking action upon their beliefs. They would, indeed, encourage this debate in the battle of ideas.

Ye shall know them by their fruits, and the frenzied actions of the left expose says all that we need to know. Their frantic efforts to silence all debate, to quash all opposition, reveals their true nature.

They do not want debate, they want power. And are willing to do anything to stop the Australian people from waking up to their radical agenda.

The problem is, for the left, that it’s probably too late. The freedom that the internet brings has allowed the Australian people to learn about their game (any wonder why Labor is so desperately trying to censor it from political thoughts they do not like?)

The Australian people have woken up, and are sick of the left. They can no longer put the genie back in the bottle. We will no longer be intimidated, and we are standing up for our rights. And the left see the end of their multi-billion dollar industry is near.

And that is why they are frothing at the mouth.

Don’t even bother visiting their hate site – not even for a laugh. For all you will see is the last, desperate gasp of a discredited ideology, and witness its adherents collapsing as they view the entire corrupt edifice that supports them crumble before their eyes.

We are seeing the end of a dark, dark, era.

We specifically framed our argument in as broad a way as possible, and in such a way to bring in not only the more free-market argument against it, but also the numerous Keynesian critiques from the left; although our obvious preference is that reconstruction be paid for through redirecting other government expenditure (such as scrapping the White Elephant NBN), to try to be as cross-partisan as possible, we also included the possibility of financing through government borrowing and stressed affects on AD.

Now, obviously we expected a bit of pushback both from Labor hacks, and from people who don’t understand economics, don’t understand how decisions are made on the margin, don’t understand aggregate effects saying “but $5 a week won’t change my spending, I can afford it”. Which is quite okay, there are a lot of economically illiterate people around, and the fault lies with the education system, not with them.

What I did not expect, however, was waking up to this:

I am laying down five thousand dollars to whoever does a hit on any of the owners of this webpage.

Or to to receive well over 100  emails and messages and facebook comments calling me a “f**khead”, a “c**t”, telling me I ought “swing from a tree”. Indeed, I, Chris (who should be enjoying his well-deserved holiday right now and instead is holed up in a backpacker’s hostel netcafe somewhere) and John (whose uninsured house itself was destroyed by 1.7m of floodwater)  have been forced to deal with a torrent of vitriol and abuse on fb after Young Labor directed their members to attack the page, the majority of whom didn’t even bother critiquing the argument, and simply engaged in, well, abuse.

To stress: this was all triggered not by my saying all Queenslanders should suffer, nor even by my arguing against government spending, but simply my questioning the precise nature how these were financed.

Now, as someone who has been through the fire of student politics, believe me, I can deal with this easily – I’ve certainly had a lot worse thrown at me, and my skin is not particularly thin. And, to be honest, I’m kinda flattered by a site that was just set up warning people about how “dangerous” I am (although I really wish they’d be accurate and call me libertarian right, not religious right).

But, considering the nature of political discourse here in the last few few weeks, the next time a leftist hack dares to complain to about civility on the right, I will, very politely, very civilly, tell him exactly where he can go shove it.

I’m sure I don’t need to convince any of you about how disastrous this would be, or go into the severely deleterious effects it will have on our economy, so, I’ll just ask you to check out the site, Follow it on Twitter, and “like” it on Facebook. And spread it to all your friends.

Thanks!

Well, there are five – what ought I have chosen?

PS: Yes, the decore ad has no relevance to Australian cultural literacy whatsoever, other than as an object of mockery and derision, but seriously, who can forget it? Also, the Toyota ad is presented not so much as a cultural symbol, but simply because of the effect it had upon the lexicon…

PPS: Never got into Louis the fly, so stop messaging me about it. Not putting it up.

I am talking about the new security theatre regime installed by the Obama Administration at U.S. airports. As of last week, air travelers in the United States going through security screening at most modern airports have only two options: either go through a scanner that shall enable security personnel to – literally – see them naked, or be subjected to an “enhanced pat down” – one that is little different to the groping of a sexual pervert – one that, according to the Transport Security Agency guidelines, requires for the feeling up of travelers genitalia. And I am not exaggerating when I say that that is what occurs. The guidelines literally say this!

Now, as readers here will know, I have slightly more sympathy for pro-national security arguments than your average libertarian (what can I say, it’s the conservative bent in me J ) Yet this new policy strikes even me as perverse. For it will do nothing to increase security (I mean, come on, any terrorist will be able to find a way about the ban if they tried, and besides, these don’t even detect most weapons), and at the same time, it is a morally abhorrent violation of the rights of U.S. citizens. The whole charade of security theatre, and all the inefficient, costly measures that it has created that perhaps in the past I was willing to turn a blind eye to, has just gone waaaay too far. And don’t think, unless we act upon it, it can’t happen in Australia.

So. Let us get into the details. Under these new rules, travelers have a choice. They can either go through a scanner – one which numerous medical authorities have said have dangerous levels of radiation (Wired notes that “scientists have also expressed concern that radiation from the devices could have long-term health effects on travelers”.) – and one which  takes clear photos of them naked (yup, you can see just how  big their ‘junk’ is), or be subjected to a “pat down” – a euphemistic expression for a procedure in which TSA rules – and again, this isn’t hyperbole – demand agents feel the crotch of passengers (and, I ought mention, also thoroughly rub and examine  the breasts if they are female). Some commentators have gone so far to call it sexual molestation – and with some justification. Oh, and think you can opt out? Once you arrive at an airport, if you refuse the naked photography/groping – even if you choose not to board the plane – you can be fined $10,000

In anycase, if you choose the nudie-scanner approach, the images have been demonstrated to be able to be saved and leaked (just yesterday 35,000 images from a U.S. Marshall’s Office – images which were pledged to be erased after every screening –  were publicly released). Fortunately for those concerned, they were from an earlier generation of scanners, which are rather blurry. But yes, just wait till the full nudie-scanners hit the interwebs and be prepared to be a star!

So how’s this gone since introduction. Let’s see. TSA agents have already been recorded putting their hands down people’s pants, cupping and squeezing a traveler’s breasts, and traumatizing children (watch this clip of a three year old girl being accosted and judge for yourself). There are already reports that  machines are being used to ogle women (one TSA operative was caught out saying “heads up, I’ve got a cutie). And you already have  proof of TSA officials  use the body scanners to make fun of people’s genitals and who pretend to find cocaine in passengers’ luggage as a prank,, and even TSA Agents proudly boasting “I am God”. There are even reports that TSA agents are – quite literally – putting their hands down people’s pants .

Consider this story from a grope-survivor:

“I said I didn’t want them to see me naked and the agent started yelling “Opt out- we have an opt here”. Another agent took me aside and said they would have to pat me down. He told me he was going to touch my genitals and asked if I wouldn’t rather just go through the scanner, that it would be less humiliating for me. I was in shock. I couldn’t believe this was happening. I kept saying I don’t want any of this to happen. I was whispering please don’t do this, please, please.”

Since Celeste didn’t agree to go through the scanner, the enhanced pat down began. “He started at one leg and then ran his hand up to my crotch. He cupped and patted my crotch with his palm. Other flyers were watching this happen to me. At that point I closed my eyes and started praying to the Goddess for strength. He also cupped and then squeezed my breasts. That wasn’t the worst part. He touched my face, he touched my hair, stroking me. That’s when I started crying. It was so intimate, so horrible. I feel like I was being raped. There’s no way I can fly again. I can’t do it.””

A good friend of mine was so traumatized from her experience last week she cancelled her trip home to visit her family for Thanksgiving. Indeed, in the last week I have spoken to about 10 people who have travelled by air since this has  come in. Ever single one – whether they chose the naked scanner, or the grope – have been traumatized. And I’m not talking about crazy anarcho-capitalist libertarians only here. I’m talking about your average American, forced to be humiliated by the state.

Of course, this has nothing to do with safety. The hours long wait at airports has already forced many to abandon air travel, and, as driving is proven to be more dangerous than flying,  by one estimate, enhanced security procedures after 9/11 led to 2,300 additional road deaths in two years..  It is simply about government exercising its power.

Now, at this point, some of you may be scratching your heads wondering “why on earth is the Obama Administration doing this”. To which I chuckle to myself and extract the following from the Washington Examiner:

“Rapiscan is one of the two companies that makes the nudie-scanners at airports for the TSA. Rapiscan CEO Deepak Chopra … recently was tapped by Obama to accompany the administration on Obama’s trip to India. Also, Chopra is an Obama donor.”

But of course, that’s not all: “Rapiscan got the other naked-scanner contract from the TSA, worth $173 million. Rapiscan’s lobbyists include Susan Carr, a former senior legislative aide to Rep. David Price, D-N.C., chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee.” Ah of course.

So this is where have have come to. The rights of citizens being trampelled upon due to a bootleggers-Baptist alliance of national-security fearmongers, and rent-seeking corporations. This is what our fear in the ‘war of terror’ has come to.  For good reason, the headline on the conservative Drudge Report (accompanied by a photo of a Catholic nun being felt-up by a TSA agent). read: The Terrorists Have Won. Because, if we have come to the stage where to board a plane you either have to be photographed naked, or groped by government operatives – when again there is no legitimate security requirement for this whatsoever, then we have a problem.

The only question is, what now Australia? For as the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, I worry if we ignore this travesty, the same thing may happen here.

(Originally posted at Thoughts on Freedom, the official blog of the Australian Libertarian Society that you all ought follow!)

I do this for a very simple reason. Specifically, I do not think most conservatives understand just why achieving their aims through the coercive power of the state is totally counterproductive, and, more pertinently at the moment, I am rather convinced that libertarians in Australia don’t realise the importance of social conservatism to achieve their aims. Which is not only strategically to our detriment, but something that, on the random off chance of a libertarian revolution, will lead to a social catastrophe of epic proportions.

Allow me to explain.  Even if we ignore the fringe elements of the now thoroughly-discredited liberaltarian movement (those people who seem to advocate rank hedonism as a necessary lifestyle choice) almost all libertarians have taken a very similar position on social matters: “You run your life how you want to, it is no business of mine as long as the state is not involved.” Which is a nice ideology in theory, but in practice, I worry that it is one that shall degenerate into total and utter failure. Because with the moral vacuum caused by the exodus of government, unless something comes in to take its place, society shall go to hell in a handbasket. In the same way that the years immediately following the collapse of communism in the USSR led to morally repugnant economic practices, I fear the same may happen in social matters if we achieve our aims, but are not careful about how we do so. Indeed, the older I get, the more I find the traditional libertarian position unsatisfactory, and somewhat of a cop-out.  To deny the real problems of broken families, of drug abuse, of the consequences of actions – this is naivety at the extreme. Which is why the only possible way libertarianism can succeed in the political sphere is by combining it with social conservatism in the personal/societal one. For if we do not do so, we shall have a world without shame, a world where everything goes. And a world that shall rapidly become a nightmare.

The impetus for this post of mine was Andrew Bolt’s piece today. I quote:

But I’d like to know how she was allowed to so forget herself and her dignity—to forget why it was shameful to get drunk, smoke dope, drive too fast, abuse the helpless or leave our children far behind in our wake.

I can’t believe that she did all this forgetting by herself. Oh no, not at all.

Maybe a generation or three ago, someone like her would at least have had a priest in her ear once a week booming: remember! “Thou shalt not.’’

Now, of course, most priests find the only people who turn up on Sundays are too creaky to need tying down with sermons.

No, these days the young and frisky must get their little homilies from government advertising instead—30-second messages of don’t smoke, don’t be a bloody idiot, don’t gamble, and talk to your children.

Mr. Bolt has a point that I think far too many libertarians ignore. As a society, we need constraints and strictures on people’s behavior. Libertarians rightly believe that these should not come from the State, but most of us pay little attention to the fact that something must fill the void.

Allow me to simply sketch out one example, that of the War on Drugs. The use of the coercive power of the state to forbid people from taking drugs – quite literally at gunpoint – is, in my mind, morally reprehensible. However, no-one in their right mind could argue that a drug-fueled society is one that shall be good for all. Sure, some people can handle drugs in the way there are functioning alcoholics, but for the most part, it is a net societal ill, and the more it can be minimized, the better off we all are. Hence why social pressures are so important. If we, as libertarians, want to get the state out of legislating morality, then we must take care to prop up social structures that take its place.

I have already discussed at length how government regulation is the root cause of most things social conservatives find abhorrent, and  how by reducing the size and scope of government most social conservative goals will be realised. But I really want to go further than that. I want to argue that the only way we can achieve a society free from government coercion  is by buttressing the social fabric of civil society. Removing the chains of government does not mean every individual should be free to pursue every vice. Rather, it ought mean that civil society should grow up.

As such, libertarians ought not endorse drugs, ought not endorse families out of wedlock, ought not endorse rampant hedonism. Rather, they must do the opposite. They must join forces with their traditional foes – the social conservatives – and recognise that the only way to achieve their policy aims is to ensure our civil society is based on a strong social conservative ethos. Because otherwise, the Sodom and Gomorrah society that shall emerge shall quickly fail and burn.

This isn’t only something that is tactically sound, or something that will ensure greater political gains. Rather, it is the only way we will be able to get a great society to flourish.

(Cross-posted at Menzies House)