Neanderpundit

regular TV has it’s moments. I was just watching Hogans Heroes and Shulz was carrying a Krag.

And as a result missed not only the first good Indy 1500 of the season but the first blogmeet.

I looked at the people that I had missed meeting, and old friends I didn’t get to see, and was a bit annoyed.
So I read the linked pages, especially of people I hadn’t met before, like this one from Tbeck on libertarianism.

He raises some interesting points, and the comment that most sticks with me is this one:

“Unless a person’s actions cause unjustifiable direct harm to others, their conduct should not be criminally sanctioned. Period.”

My question to Tbeck, and the most important question, is this: Who gets to decide what is harm?

This is the hamartia of Libertarianism.

ἁμαρτία, for those lucky bastards that didn’t have greek jammed in them in high school, means “Tragic flaw” sort of. There isn’t, strictly speaking, a perfect english translation. It sort of means “That flaw which is, in itself, a core principle of the individual, and it’s undoing”

The Hamartia of Libertarianism is that that it purports to be a philosophy of individual liberty, but in espousing that supposed liberty it specifically denies others the right to their own liberties.

Case in point: Gay marriage. No big deal, right? Gays can do anything they want. Who are we to stop them?

THe simple fact is that the gay agenda is specific to one thing, and that is the destruction of religion in any forms it considers unacceptible, in other words, any theology that is antithetical to homosexuality.

Libertarians have been around long enough that they should understand the law of unintended consequences, but this is a classic case where they are deliberately blinded to their own ignorance.

Tbeck goes on to say

“Once we start legislating based upon personal opinions and biases we end up with the ugly mess we have now”

which is of course the whole problem. If Libertarians had their way, we would all be living accoring to their personal opinions and biases, wouldn’t we? it is inconceivable to most libertarians that everyone in their heart of hearts isn’t a libertarian. Yes, Virginia, they actually think that, or at least the most ardent ones I know personally do. Like Communism, they think if someone just gets it right once, then everything will be pixie dust and roses.

As I’ve said before, if libertarianism didn’t exist, the liberals would have to invent it. No other single force has done more to destroy conservatism and classical liberalism in America than the influence of the Libertards, and that includes the large L and small L types, just because of the tragic, fatal flaw in the concept of libertarianism itself; libertarianism wants everyone to be libertarians- or else.

I had a bumper crop of acorns from my largest oak. My intention was to mail them out, and I did a few test mailings, but that didn’t work out so well. They either arrived desiccated or wormy, so I don’t think mailing was a good idea.

What I did do was to hand carry them everywhere I went, and I probably spread twenty pounds of them around north America.

I looked for places where there were grassy clearings in wooded areas that were unlikely to get mowed. I looked for good deep soil and remote areas. I dug holes with my pocketknife or a little trowel I carried in the truck or I simply stomped them into the ground wherever I could.

I have planed oaks in Kansas, iowa, Wisconsin, Missouri, damned near every rest stop in Indiana, a piece of property I’m privileged to be allowed to hunt in Indiana, a similar piece of property in Illinois, several Illinois forest preserves, lots of abandoned property.

if even one tree grows as a result I will be well pleased. And the tree looks to be making a bumper crop already again this year, and knowing what I know now, I will be able to properly store the acorns before they get buggy this year. Sorry for anyone who was hoping for some, but as I learn and figure out what to do, I will be sending them your way.