Paradocracy

The ideal of the socialist is such that when we talk, we say nothing new or offensive, ideally nothing at all, and we keep a strict tally of our syllables and decibels to ensure that there’s sufficient space for the others.  When we work, we continue only what has already been done, never doing more than we're instructed, and we do it for free without any byproducts or useful product for that matter.  When we travel, we do it between work and home, with as little spontaneity and style as possible, preferably by bicycle or by foot, or most ideally not at all, so as to avoid offending the planet or encountering another person, who is otherwise known as a victim.  When we exercise or study, we do it for the benefit of everybody, not for ourselves, and when this serves us an advantage, we offset it by severing a limb, by undergoing a lobotomy, or by pretending to be no different.  When we compete, we declare everybody a winner, but nobody wins, so we ...

I met a woman today, and it took her less than five minutes to point out that she is black and that people of color have different needs. She said she studied this subject in college in California, that her courses enlightened her of the various needs which uniquely face the black community and require commensurate community organization to satisfy those ends. This woman casually charged the entire community, independent of needs, wants and racial composition, with the assumed responsibility of catering to the needs of others whom they don’t even know, and she completed this statement as if the unmentioned history of slavery had miraculously or conveniently escaped her recollection to fail to caution her against such systems rooted inextricably in force and coercion. First, there are no pure needs in this world, only axiomatic or conditional wants. In the most fundamental of senses, even those most basic needs are plainly wants demanded for survival. Indeed, no one truly nee...

The Millennial generation can be aptly summarized by the occasional event witnessed along local thoroughfares and across numerous YouTube channels: the motorist who casually drives his or her 7-year-financed car into another vehicle, despite having noticed that other vehicle with more than sufficient time to brake and avoid striking it, only to stubbornly blame the other driver for getting in his or her way.  The contemporary zeitgeist contends that there is always somebody else to blame.  Taking personal responsibility appears to be a relic of a time gone by, seldom serving the generation which has grown so widely accustomed to an institutional or systematic solution to every identifiable or imaginable problem.  In this case, whether it is a driver who has suddenly turned into traffic or another who has driven through a stop sign or passed through a red light, the motorist is always best served by exercising his or her own judgment to avoid danger, instead of thoug...

It's another swing and a miss for MarketWatch in their latest hit piece labeled Here's why these baseball players may suffer from the $1.3 trillion spending bill .  In this modern melodrama of First World proportions, MarketWatch distributes yet another Leftist propaganda piece, lamenting the exemption of minor league baseball players from the federal minimum wage law.  As it turns out, athletes pursue minor league ball not to get rich, but to prove themselves on the field in hopes of a chance to ascend to the majors and maybe eventually achieve riches.  In fact, most athletes take a tremendous risk in pursuing their respective sports, working countless hours off the official clock to improve their strength, aptitude and performance.  Additionally, there are millions of athletes who will never earn a penny through their respective sports, yet they have been motivated by the potential to compete at that level, and they invest their time, money and tireless ...

Perhaps the most dangerous and costly intellectual endeavor is that nearly involuntary, visceral inclination to equip a thoughtful idea with the power of law.  There is all the difference in the world between a worthy proposition and one backed by the unquestionable scope and authority of law.  Remember, laws are neither soft suggestions nor guidelines for human behavior; they are absolute mandates supported by violent force and coercion.  Proportionality, then, is an important standard to satisfy before rushing to the sweeping supposition that any iron-fisted law might prove successful in rectifying the perceived problem.  In order to best preserve the freedoms which form the most atomic and precious bases for life, we must consistently investigate the marks and standards which ostensibly justify the invocation of law to carry out given aims, while always erring on the side of freedom.  That is, of course, if we are to sustain a free world. Whereas ...

Across many of the United States, it has nearly become illegal to sneeze while driving. Just short of that, states have begun to clamp down on handheld cell phone use while driving.  This measure clearly tugs on the heartstrings of constituents and passive onlookers who identify with the spirit of the law, and yet those who parrot the talking points of safety seldom distribute anything more than a familiar form of conventional wisdom, while concomitantly embodying further examples of those content with the strategy of squandering every ounce of freedom for a few drops of presumed safety.  Consider the hypothetical study commissioned to demonstrate a high inverse correlation between auto accidents and IQ.  As a consequence of this contrived study, one might suppose that those of relatively lower IQ ought to be prohibited from driving.  After all, platitudes abound wherever one discovers the subject of safety.  What's more, the preponderance of road acci...