Author: James E. Miller

James E. Miller is the editor-in-chief of Mises Canada. He works as a copywriter in Washington D.C.

indiana

Indiana’s religion law and liberal left’s intolerance

Reprinted from the Press and Journal:

Not long ago, I noted in the Press and Journal that the cultural clash over same-sex marriage was won. The side in favor gay nuptials was victorious. Cultural conservatives, for all the ire and fist-shaking, lost the fight for traditional marriage in America.

The best we could hope for was, as New York Times columnist Ross Douthat put it, the “terms of our surrender” would be respected.

Well, we can now officially say that battle is lost. The recent hullabaloo over Indiana’s passing of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is symbolic of liberal triumphalism taken to an extreme degree. The left isn’t just taking a victory lap; they are pounding their ideology into all nonbelievers. The outrage is borderline epileptic.

Here’s what I mean. Time columnist and former professional basketball player Kareem Abdul-Jabbar described the Indiana law as ushering in an “American version of Sharia law.” Forbes writer Ben Kepes likened the law to Kristallnacht. Various big-name businesses are threatening to boycott the state over the measure. Connecticut Gov. Dan Malloy went as far as to sign an executive order barring state-funded travel to Indiana, stating that the law “turn[ed] back the clock on progress.”

(more…)

class_rings_captain_planet_by_Musical_Devil

Noninterventionist Super Friends, assemble!

Is there anything Hillary Clinton doesn’t have?

Millions of dollars from speaking fees, a private email server, a beloved husband, undying respect from empty-headed women, and infinite political connections. Oh, and all that foreign money, of course.

For someone as popular and well-connected as Clinton, you’d think the only thing she’s missing is a diamond as big as the Ritz. But now, the former First Lady has been gifted with something new: her own Thought Police squadron. A group calling itself “HRC Super Volunteers” has pledged to uncover “coded sexism” as the 2016 race heats up. And here I thought that was Salon.com’s job.

The group is wasting being the Praetorian guard against misogyny. Here are the words, according to these high-strung ladies and beta men, that reveal inner sexism when used to describe Hillary: polarizing, calculating, disingenuous, insincere, ambitious, inevitable, entitled, overconfident, secretive, out of touch, will do anything to win, and represents the past.

How cute. HRC Super Volunteers think they’ll sway the debate in Hillary’s favor by harping about latent sexism. Good thing few people care about such nonsense. The only folks who will be persuaded are Hillary-loving progressives. Their minds won’t be changed, but their convictions will be further confirmed.

(more…)

16145031647_ee7359c298_k

There is no freedom in being uncomfortable within your skin

It was only a matter of time before libertarianism jumped the shark.

The childishly optimistic sect of the liberty movement is moving past pot legalization and gay marriage. Their detente with liberals resulted in a massive culture victory. Pot and sodomy are de rigueur in mainstream American culture, whether you agree with them or not. Those troglodyte conservatives can wipe their tears with white flags!

The next fight for libertarians lies in the traditional gender spectrum. Not content to keep politics within politics, the loud-mouthed revolutionaries are moving into the messy world of transgenderism. This is a huge jump from the philosophy associated with Adam Smith and Friedrich Hayek. Ayn Rand would be frowning in heaven if she didn’t think God put a damper on her ego trip.

In a recent Daily Beast column, Reason Magazine’s Nick Gillespie praises the latest American hero: Olympic athlete Bruce Jenner. Wait a second, you may say. Didn’t Jenner trounce the Soviets in the decathlon almost three decades ago?  Why is he now the latest emblem of liberation?

(more…)

2939194510_a362316bc0_o

Death and taxes

I violate the libertarian code by calling for a war tax in my latest piece for Taki’s Mag. Here is an excerpt:

“What is taxation but theft on a gigantic, unchecked, scale?”

Murray Rothbard’s question doesn’t have an answer. The coercive taking of money is theft. No exceptions. Mental masturbation on the “social contract” or necessities of public action don’t eliminate that fact. The duties and obligations of society shouldn’t translate into pickpocketing folks to pay for a myriad of welfare goods.

That said, I’m ready to do the philosophically impossible: compromise. Call me a squish; I’ll own it. But the matter is of high importance. Bickering over marginal tax rates is a debate for DC talking heads. I’m talking about the most important topic: war. It’s a topic of such importance that serious folks in the news glide over it like it were a peaceful outing in the country. Americans treat war as a state of being. We’re stuck with it, we’re told, because danger lurks behind every corner.

If that’s the case – and it very well is – then I propose an unorthodox idea: let’s pay for war. I don’t mean rack up deficits and debt to foot the bill now. I mean have an actual tax that pays for sending soldiers and weapons over to foreign lands. Whether it be a tax on income or the final sale of goods is no matter. Tax, baby, tax!

Read the whole thing here.

(Image source)

stocks

A response to Nick Ford: get off your high horse bro

By golly, I’ve stumbled upon another reason libertarians will never win: the complete absence of a sense of humor.

“It’s happening” gifs notwithstanding, the liberty movement can’t take a joke. I write one measly piece poking fun at a silly idea, and suddenly I’m a monster. Go figure. I’ve been through this crapshoot before, but the game is getting old.

Here’s what I’m talking about: my recent article on the anti-work crusade has engendered an interesting response from the target of ridicule, Mr. Nick Ford. This wasn’t your typical internet rebuttal. Rather, it was a “meta” rejoinder that focused on the style of my argument rather than the substance. For that, I say, “good job Mr. Ford.” The nature of debate is a topic seldom discussed today. Liberals too often wax and pamper their own victim status, while conservatives cherish their fatalism — a flaw I’m certainly guilty of.

Ford contends that my entire takedown of his philosophy is compromised by not fully understanding his view. He claims my critique “isn’t much of a critique at all.” I made the mistake of going off “on tangents” and brought up “irrelevant” points in “pretty noxious ways.” To Ford, I committed the great crime of not being “familiar” with my subject. Clearly, I deserve a good stint in the stocks!

Jokes aside, do Ford’s accusations have any merit?

(more…)

15240088197_abe9ea5b0f_o

For the U.S., force is not enough to defeat ISIS

Reprinted from the Press and Journal:

She never saw it coming.

Appearing on MSNBC’s “Hardball with Chris Matthews,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf was caught off-guard by the host’s tough questions. When asked what it will take for the U.S. to defeat the Islamic State, Harf admitted “we cannot win this war by killing them.”

She went further: “We need in the medium and longer term to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it’s a lack of opportunity for jobs.”

Islamic radicals are capturing vast swaths of Iraq and Syria because they want… jobs?

(more…)