Anarchy has a very small half-life.

There's a sort of "purity" at that blog that amazes even me.

It sounds like postmodern claptrap to me, Kate, thus
illustrating that a little learning is a dangerous thing.

Oh, I don't think you can blame any of that on "learning".

Maitre...allow me to correct you..

'a little knowledge is a DANGEROUS thing'..and i quote further...

'drink deep or taste not the Gorean/Pierian spring
shallow draughts there intoxicate the brain
while drinking largely sobers us again"

Her "argument" brings this to mind.

anyway i agree...true democracy...the agora in full spate and cry is VERY messy..it is never a formulaic resolution of conflict but a(and i hate to use the word but a 'dialectic' process)which requires patience..and of course time...

Well, Kate, she learned that Anarchist is a perennially
trendy word. The problem is, apparently that's about it.

Roger that, John, I corrected it just as you were correcting
me. Of course, it was also in part two thereto that he wrote:
To err is human, to forgive divine. ;-)

I find it entertaining that she seems to see no inherent contradiction between "maximizing personal liberty" and "authority devolved to the local level and exercised through direct democracy". But then these kind of pie-in-the sky armchair politicos always seem to think themselves terribly smart when they "discover" something Enlightenment philosophers figured out three hundred years ago.

We had a local "barter network" congratulate themselves endlessly on solving the problem of "I want to trade with Bob, but I don't have anything Bob wants" with the introduction of "barter dollars". Good job, geniuses, you've successfully invented money. ::facepalm::

Very droll, EBD ;-)

She also reminds me of these anarcho-syndicalist communes.

I noted that one of our little anarchist's first links was to 'Activist Teacher' who headlines his most recent post with "Mainstream Mindf**k...." and goes on to say:

"Whose problem is an overly large public debt? Simply zero the debt. Or if the lender is the public purse then zero the interest on the public part of the debt. If the result is that private banks will refuse to lend more then the result is that private banks will have lost their instrument of extortion. The state can print its own public money and lend it where needed on a basis of trust."

So, HIS version of gov't will lend out money to those they 'trust' to pay it back (yeah, right) while HIS gov't can simply zero the debt they themselves create.

And we allow such people near our children!

Thanks Vitruvius and EBD for the MP, much appreciated.

At first I felt I was reading something written by Iggy, then after further attempts I realized I was giving attention to some kid who just smoked a doobie.

Speaking of anarchy, my early Christmas present was a toque my wife knitted for me with the anarchy symbol on it. She posted the picture of it on Facebook and everyone was joking that it meant the "A with a hole in it". I can only assume she loves me and supports my wish for less government,...I hope that is what she meant :)

Well if she were a true anarchist she wouldn't be writing anything. Its hard to write a cogent sentence with no rules of Grammar, Spelling etc.

Quite so, Joe, and that's related to my first comment in this entry. Anarchy, pure anarchy, is nothing. Nothing doesn't exist. Ergo, pure anarchy doesn't exist. Humans are systemic creatures. Thus they self organize, and remarkably quickly. If you have any organization, you don't have anarchy. Anarchy doesn't exist.

My wife's paternal family had some interaction with Nestor Makhno's band of anarchists in 1918 and 1919 near Zaporozhye, Ukraine, on a couple of occasions. It was not a good thing. Once a bullet creased her grandfather's forehead and on another occasion, a small band of Makhnovste rode into the village and wanted to shoot the village administration. My wife's grandfather was the mayor at the time and only the fact that his father had saved this sub-leader's father's life in the late 1800s, deterred the man and he and his group rode out of the village.

Makhno is a sort of patron saint to these people.

I believe that the definition has been diluted for years.

BTW, the 'Activist Teacher' is none other than Denis Rancourt, a physics prof from the U. of Ottawa who was recently fired.

He's best known for awarding all students an A+ because grades, are of course, meaningless and a construct of the patriarchy.

One wonders: Why not then assign everyone a 'D' rather than an 'A+'? Perhaps because a meaningless 'D' would be an affront to his students while a meaningless 'A+' is deserved.

Anarchy: it's all about jamming a stick in the spokes of anything meaningfull.

If Makhno lead a band, it was not anarchy.
Anarchy must, by definition, be leaderless.

"Anarchy" is like peoples' democratic republic: it means communist dictatorship.

Vitruvius @ 12:25 "If Makhno lead a band, it was not anarchy."

That is why he did not get along too well with "pure" anarchists in western Europe. At one point in 1919, he had upwards of 10,000 men. He fought against the Petliurists, the Reds (when he wasn't allied with them), but mostly against the Whites.

Understood. So anarchy is a word he and all of them use[d] to describe
their fradulent hiding of their own personal responsibility in the matter.

Kate writes in the update ~ This is an anarchist.

Brilliant.

Still and all, though, the half-life of bureaucracy-free
is only marginally greater than the half-life of anarchy.
Far as I can tell, humans just don't work that way.

say it together now---"We're all individuals" and again.

Sure, yet we're clumps of individuals too. One has
to use all the cards to play the hand one's dealt.

Looks like there is complete anarchy in anarchist academia as they can't even agree on the definition of "anarchist". As a teenager I used to call myself an anarchist as this seemed to be the closest established belief system to my seemingly innate hatred of government and bureaucracy.

After dealing with "anarchists" when I first moved to Vancouver, I realized I had nothing in common with them aside from a shared hatred of authority but they seemed to despise business more than government. Under the nosology of the article that started this thread I would be described as an anarcho-capitalist which seems to be a pejorative term in the anarcho-socialist lexicon.

Vitruvius has a more rigid definition of anarchy which is something that does not exist in real life. Humans are social animals and thus some form of social organization will occur whenever people are put together in groups. I happen to like self organizing systems and prefer to work in such groups where individuals with common interests come together and work in loose associations. There seems to be another human tendency and that is to bureaucratize informal human groupings which is more likely to happen in larger groups than small groups. The best way to perform a particular task may be through a rigidly structured hierarchical system which I have no problem with as long as all participants join such a group of their own free will and the group has a clearly defined purpose which doesn't change except with the consent of all participants.

The perennial fascination of young people with socialism something that I've been been pondering for decades as I went through a (fortunately very brief) socialist period. For a while I was part of a loose collective which consisted of a fluctuating number of people who had access to a shared house and, as I didn't live there, I'd make sure I brought enough beer for everyone if I happened to drop by. One of the "leaders" of this collective was a Che Guevara idolizing socialist whose main employment seemed to be periodically going to S. American countries as the representative of one organization or another to help organize peasants although I suspect he greatly facilitated his income with drug smuggling which was much easier to do in the 1970's.

We had very long discussions about politics and one of the disagreements we had I didn't resolve until 30 years after our talk. One day after a communal dinner and lots of beer he pointed out how everybody in our "collective" got along beautifully and this was an example of how society should be organized. I agreed with him that we certainly did get along famously, but didn't agree about extending the type of socialist model to the rest of society. I just had a gut feeling about it and couldn't articulate why at the time.

What struck me a few years ago is that the reason socialism doesn't work is because it scales very poorly. Capitalism scales very well and it is a dynamic self-organizing system which produces as good a solution as one can get to matching peoples wants with sources that can satisfy those wants. Families are socialist systems and our loose collective was also socialist but it was small and self-selected.

Thus far I haven't had a single self-declared socialist come up with an argument against my pointing out socialism's scaling problem. Since socialism is essentially not practical in large groups of people (sort of like using a bubble sort algorithm for datasets with millions of elements) the only way that it can deal with the resultant problems in a country size group is to devolve to a totalitarian dictatorship.

So there's nothing wrong with socialist social groups that are small and the maximum size that works is likely the size of the largest successful Israeli kibbutz. The socialist groupings have to be small enough that people can easily leave them if they are dissatisfied and also need to be embedded in an anarcho-capitalist substrate for the system to function optimally.

I prefer "libertarian" to "anarcho-capitalist" but the terms are isomorphic.

I certainly don't think that libertarian and anarcho-capitalist are isomorphic, Loki; speaking as a founding member of the Libertarian Party of Alberta in 1972, I see myself as a minarchic- free- marketist, and most definately not as an anarcho- capitalist. Still, I agree with the general points you are making. Arguing about words like this, which is what Molly was doing first supra, is pretty much silly, unless you are doing it for fun, and including lots of Monty Python Philosophy links ;-)

Old Women! MAN!

Anarchism does indeed have a very short half-life.
Albania descended into anarchy after the communist regime colapsed in the 90's. The result was chaos....rampant riot and looting....NATO descided to interveen....the first unit was the Italian Bersigliari (a penal regiment noted for brutal valour) and after landing at the capital restored order without firing a shot.....Albanians may be revolting people but are not stupid. Anarchy lacks any capability/structure to defend a beach....or a city.
Soamalia devolved briefly into anarchy but society and nature abhor a vacuum and the vacuum was immediately filled by tribalism, gangs and warlords---primitive social structure.
Government must exist but be minimal.....socialism always means BIG INCOMPETANT, INEFFICIENT GOVERNMENT....and TOTALITARIAN dictatorship.

The left's list of illegitimately co-opted words like "green" and "liberal" is long and egregious enough, but the list of meanings - i.e. thoughts - that have been illegitimately and connotatively co-opted is greater still. Leftists care about other people - which puts conservatives in rather stark relief. Leftists believe in "justice," (say that one loud) - as opposed to, say, po-facedly getting in justice's way for unjust reasons. A leftist is someone who believes in peace, so you know what that says about conservatives. And the left believes in human rights, ergo...

Kate's right: Anarchy IS preferable to Marxism. And based on the built-in ineffability of what it means - it's not like "love," or "green" - it's still up for grabs; in an era of rampant word-theft, it might be one of the few remaining words available to, umm, reel inand put behind our backs. I mean, if you're part of an armed group who individually can't string two coherent thoughts together, and you disrupt an incursive socialist assembly, that makes you an anarchist in the - then-Statist - vernacular. Plus, if Molly Mew approaches to confront you, someone can lure her off to the side and neutralize her with a decades-long discussion...

Re "Green": in my experience, 'conservatives' do more personally towards greening of the planet via their own backyards than do self-professed "Greens", who often admit to not having a "Green thumb", hehe ...

Anarchy IS NOT preferable to Marxism.
Anarchy is as bad as Marxism and neither is "good for you" because the later wants to regulate your life completely and the former rejects any rules.

With all due respect, Ella, Anarchy would always be preferable to Marxism. To reject the utter and complete regulation of one's life by others - Marxists, in the chosen example - who have different ideas isn't a perfect analog to rejecting "any rules" within one's own chosen ambit, whether that be family, friends, or community.

Refusing to recognize and obey a Marxist authority is a preferable state to that of obedience to Marxism, even if the intractable one is incapable of making a coherent/compelling case for his resistance, or positing an equally compelling counter-assertion as to who should rule.

Ineloquence, dissipation, and unwillingness to make world-rules for others is a natural resting-point, whereas Marxism is constructed, tribal aggression.

Mrolly is lost in hre own words; asea in an ocean of unknowing. Anarchy can only be s temporary state between overthrown authority and a newly installed thugocracy, banditry or gangsterism.

For all the theorists of anarchy of the late 19th and early 20th century, they were out of touch with reality and achieved nothing but youthful vainglory.

Libertarianism is the only option, regarding the state as a necessary evil; thus it should be held to the minimum, which is to hold the thugs, bandits and gangsters at bay.

No matter what kind of system you have, or think you have, SOMEONE will be giving the orders.

I'm a liberterian, but I've been checking out canadian anarco-capitalist Stefan Molyneux youtube channel:

http://www.youtube.com/user/stefbot

The dude got some interesting points and he's anti-state not anti-law. I'm still a miniarcist though ;)

The Tea Party movement in the US is much closer to the anarchist ideal than many of the actual anarchists I hung out with 20 years ago.

That blogger's lousy definition of anarcho-capitalism gives her away. "Peasants"? The hell? And the whole couple of sentences is completely flawed. So.

However, some posters here are equally confused. The anarchy this woman is talking about is not post-uprising 'chaos'; that is the vernacular understanding, but Anarchism (capital A) is a political philosophy like Marxism.

Although I think the world would be a better place if the right became anarchist - let's start with stating loudly as possible in those crappy lineups at airport security that "I am not a terrorist!"

Anarchist - a communist with a leather jacket and a bad haircut

It never stops to amaze me how much smokers INSIST the tobacco smoke that they just exhaled has to be inhaled by someone else.

I have a neigbour who smokes many cheap sigarets, those stinky ones who allegedly have rat tails ground into the mix by the folks on reserve. He does not do that in his home, no! He prefers to sit on his porch and smoke 2-3 sigs on a nice windless night. Whole neigbourhood stinks of burnt fingernails as he enjoys puffing.

This is a kind of person, whose right you, Kate, choose to defend. I know, I know - tough luck for me, I should move and stuff...

You choose to defend the right to order trans fats. Obviously you would oppose any ban on MSG too as those two share essentially same goal - making food cheaper. It would not matter to you that for example for me enjoyment of life is completely ruined by use of MSG in food industry. I can no longer eat foods I love since I was a child.

You are a monster, Kate. I have to say it even though I share the same conservative individualist views as you (of course if you are genuine about that).

I'm in favour of people owning Rottweilers, too.

Take that.

Rottweiler or corsino, I could not care less. Why do you insist that people have a right to poison others?

Boy, Aaron sure is in favour of individual freedoms except when it inconvienences him ;)

So, smokers should be banned from smoking outside?!?!? wtf, where are they supposed to shorten their lifespans then. Banning transfats is the equivalent of promising rainbows and unicorns to solve the obesity problem. Finally as for MSG, everyone needs to purge their systems with a good bout of diarrhea now and then (don't they)?

You have no idea what MSG is doing to you. Education is the missing part.

I was struck by this item, in part because I have been, as part of a hiring committee for a professorship, run across an application by a well known US professor who self-identifies as an anarchist. His "anarchism" hasn't prevented him from entering fully into academic administration, the grantsmanship game, and all of the petty politics of academia. The more I studied his file and, with the aid of my research assistant, young Master Google, a picture emerged of a pretty cosy network of "activist" professors who were deep into pretty traditional academic log-rolling. Some of them, too, claimed the "anarchist" label, even as they served as Deans and other bum-boys of the Man. On the other hand, several showed their bravery and commitment to the cause by signing a petition in support of William Ayers.

They were chancers and opportunists in the 1960s and haven't changed a bit.

Looking at the picture of the cute wildebeests, I'd say that there are far more anarchists out there, albeit for different reasons that what they would say.

There ought to be a law against people trying to control each other.

This reminds me of the teenager's perennial cry:

"I want to be different...JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE!".

So sad.

From Loki at 1:15 - "We had very long discussions about politics and one of the disagreements we had I didn't resolve until 30 years after our talk. One day after a communal dinner and lots of beer he pointed out how everybody in our "collective" got along beautifully and this was an example of how society should be organized."

They got along beautifully because they were a self selected group of people, and anyone who didn't feel they belonged could get up and leave any time they wanted to. If they try to organize the whole country like that, results may vary.

Aaron I consider you a threat to my health and well being.
I smoke to protect me from that arch-toxin....second-hand smoke. You would deny me that.....
It has been proven with "peer-revued science that second hand smoke can rip the crome of a LADA bumper 2 blocks upwind.
BTW I can also piss off my porch.

edit: CHROME

I agree with Joe and Vitruvius; pure anarchy cannot exist for any period of time because it is the lack of order; existence requires organization of matter.

Molly's definitions are specious and contradictory. If it's anarchy, then it cannot include her requirement of 'principles at the basis of anarchism'. And her term of 'anarcho-capitalism' implies that capitalism has no basic principles - when, of course, it rests on a free market exchange by conscious agents who evaluate the exchange - not a random blind exchange.

I also think she doesn't understand evolutionary biology if she thinks it has anything to do with anarchy, for all biological systems are organized; and adapative capacities are not random and accidental but informational.

Anarchy is preferable to Marxism because anarchy, as the non-existence of order, can only be a short-term revolutionary phase that deconstructs the old rules and permits new ones to self-organize.

sasquatch,

As long as you are smoking in enclosed location and do not insist that I re-inhale the smoke you just exhaled, I agree that you have a right. But you don't have a right to get me involved in your self-destructing habits. Can we agree on that?

Similarly, if you would like to eat processed foods laced with MSG, I wholeheartedly agree that you have full rights. However because it is legal to poison everyone with MSG, there are no foods w/o it. Further, food industry refuses to properly label foods containing the additive.

What motivates you to insist others have to be poisoned into pain and suffering?

I'll give you another example, sasq: you have a right to commit suicide by shooting yourself in the head, but if the bullet exits your skull and kills or injures someone else, it will be too late to punish you. So do you have a right to kill yourself and drag others with you?

My guess is aron wants total government control over every move we make. I think my answer wont get through the filter, but he can do the same as the hrc.

I really dont know squat about anarchy, its philosophy, practionteurs or wannabees. When I think anarchist (small a) I conceive of only one person.
Those of you who are older may recall the greatest character and literary series ever producer by a CANADIAN ( yes I've heard of Lucy Maud), perhaps the greatest epitome of "Events" vs "Joyful Bloodymindedness" as I've come across. Donald Jacks' Bartholomew Bandy. For those who dont know ( Jack was very slightly aside from the CanLit crowd but glad to take accolades or cash when offered and is therefore not in the Pantheon), the Bandy Papers are the memoir of a callow youth early innoculated against hypocrisy who goes off to serve God, King and Bureaucracy in WW1. " Three Cheers For Me", " Thats Me in the Middle" " Its Me Again"; hmmm... a possible theme for Anarchists?
Its in your local library: read em' and pee yourself laughing; myself I think I will try to find a new Hardcover royalty paying copy.
Happy New Year
Robert Albin
Calgary

I agree with you, Aaron. It's like saying that I have the right to dump chemicals into anyone's drinking water that I please. If you are going to smoke, keep it out of my airspace. It's the polite thing to do - you're free to poison yourself but keep the poison away from me.

So, her socialist anarchy is an egalitarian individualistic direct democracy. Where everyone is free to do anything.*

*Provided the mob likes you.

The cognitive dissonance must be painful.

PS. I do not regard McDonald Frazers "Flashman" as an Anarchist.

Anarchy has a very small half-life.
Posted by: Vitruvius at December 30, 2009 11:17 PM

Ever heard of Somalia Vit?

> My guess is aron wants total government control over every move we make.

Where did I state that, FREE?

Free,

I'll give you another example, which hopefully will not go over your hand. I believe that everyone has a right to keep and bear arms, but I also believe that people do not have a right to shoot clays in their backyard if shot can hit their neighbours. Understand?

The perennial fascination of young people with socialism something that I've been been pondering for decade
Posted by: loki at December 31, 2009 1:15 AM

To me, it's simply the last point of maturation of the child: the last stage before acceptance of personal responsibility.

Like any child who will fuss, tantrum, cajole, negotiate, any way possible to get out of responsibility and/or work, looking for a utopia where personal responsibility is diffused and material needs largely accommodated, all while minimizing work - I think it the natural state for anyone during the process of maturation.

Those who mature successfully recognize the molecular nature of the individual. Those who refuse and deny individuality in exchange for less think remain selfish, and by extension, immature, underdeveloped citizens who desire to impose their will upon others for their own benefit.

typo: over your head.

hardboiled - good definition of a Hippy !

hardboiled - I wouldn't consider Somalia an anarchy; its devolved into numerous clans and tribes, each with their own turf and rules which are probably based in old pre-modern tribal customs.

A genuine anarchy is a random 'mob' without order. Once order emerges, that's the end of anarchy, and the reality of our material world is that randomness can't last for long; the 'need to organize' is a basic fact of matter.

Somalia, a country of illiterate people, vaguely familiar with quran. What could be scarier?

Aaron, I take it you don't operate a motor vehicle of any kind? Don't operate any vehicle (including a lawnmower) with an internal combustion engine? Don't have a fireplace or oil-fueled furnace?

All of those things produce airborne contaminants that poison other people.

Why pick on smoking?

Don't get me wrong...I don't like second-hand smoke either...but really, at what point do we draw the line? I suspect that if you were to (literally) "draw the line" between what you consider to be acceptable restrictions on a person's freedom and unacceptable restrictions, your line would be VERY crooked.

Smoking is, in my opinion, a self-inflicted injury (the extent of the injury or damage varies)...health care services provided to address damage to your health from smoking should be paid for by the smoker, NOT the rest of society. The smoker should also be held liable for the damages that second-hand smoke cause to others...the smoke is THEIR doing and therefore should be THEIR responsibility.

I would argue that the exhaust from internal combustion engines (ICE's) should be considered as similar to cigarette smoke...we are all poisoning each other. Do we outlaw engines or not cover health expenses related to the exhaust from ICE's?

Of course, obesity can be viewed as a self-inflicted injury, too(unless, I would argue, the obesity is the result of a disease/condition that is not readily controllable by the individual)...should we force fat people to pay for obesity-related health care?

Where do we draw the line? I can't give you a good answer...I suspect you would have difficulties, too.

Paraphrasing a favourite quote..."The difference between wise men and fools is that fools are always so sure of themselves".

ella @ 2:52 says "Anarchy is as bad as Marxism and neither is "good for you" because the later wants to regulate your life completely and the former rejects any rules." Without going into detail, my wife's gpa during the years 1918-20 would have agreed with ella.

The only difference between the anarchists and the Marxists was that Marxism was an ever tightening strangulation, a constant looking for "enemies of the people", whereas the anarchists sometimes were drunk enough, had raped enough or stolen enough, to be satiated for a while.

Aaron said, "However because it is legal to poison everyone with MSG, there are no foods w/o it. Further, food industry refuses to properly label foods containing the additive."

Aaron, smarten up. Grow a garden, can your foods, hunt your meat, buy it from a farmer, and stop eating processed food.

No food w/out MSG, indeed.

Somalia isn't anarchy, it is tribal and gangster. War loads lord it over ethnic groups and, I expect, provide "protection".

"Ok, people, let's get organized here. All left-handed anarchists form up on the right, you righties go to the left..."

Kate @ 9:06 "Take that." I agree. You can't have it both ways, you either believe in people's freedoms or the slippery slope of evermore control of your life. Each new control becomes easier to implement.

Ken, you are comparing apples and oranges.

Agent Smart and Agent 99 should be dispatched immediately to investigate.

> Aaron, smarten up. Grow a garden, can your foods, hunt your meat, buy it from a farmer, and stop eating processed food.

While I have to quit my job according to you, will you be agreeable to support my family, only because it is legal to make food cheaper by poisoning it?

Organization is a way of applying a diverse set of skills to the challenge of surviving. A collection of anarchists ceases to be a collection of anarchists. So I have to agree, the half life is quite small.

Then what remains is the nature of organization. No matter the system of organization - capitalist, tribal, Marxist, Liberal Party of Canada - there seems never to be a shortage of others driven by the need to control others. It is this control which I reject. Rejecting attempts to control through coercion, corruption, tyranny, imprisonment, slavery, indenture are not co-operative, and not mutually rewarding. Rejecting these types of controls is not 'anarchy'.

The day the left stops attempting to place me in a cage is the day I become a leftist.

Anyone know where the number of the local anarchist's support group? Is there a government-funded 800 anarchist's crisis line available?

Yes, Aaron, I completely agree. Everyone must be prohibited from committing any action that could have any real or perceived negative impact on any aspect of my existence.

"It would not matter to you that for example for me enjoyment of life is completely ruined by use of MSG in food industry. I can no longer eat foods I love since I was a child."

May I pass on the wisdom of the ancients?

Suck it up.

Oh, and learn to cook from scratch. Compared to wheat, MSG is merely a nuisance. Be thankful you aren’t celiac. If you can no longer enjoy life because your favorite yummies are off limits, then you have problems deeper than the purely culinary.

Currently, an anarchist is some disaffected youth who hates his parents. As a political system, anarchy is disastrous.
The stunning thing is that people are too proud to get a clue. Communism and socialism are abysmal failures and there is nothing "progressive" about screaming misogynistic anti-Semites who can't spell and still have trouble locating Canada on a map. This whole reluctance to embrace systems that DO work isn't just sad; it's immoral.

No, Tenebris, you don't understand.
You don't know what it is like to be in excruciating pain for weeks just because something you ate had MSG added or was soaked in MSG solution (like they do with fresh green vegetables, strawberries, grapes and nuts).

I keep asking what your motivation is for advocating MSG in food and I hear crickets.

As for your definition of yummies, include all sauces, all canned food, everything which is produced by fermentation (hard and soft cheezes, feta, sour cream, kefir, yogurt), sourdough bread, most pastas, most beans and lots of other foods.

You just have no idea what it is like to be MSG sensitive - AND FOR WHAT SAKE IS MY SUFFERING? So that food industry can make world fat to double their income.

What does that have to do with individual freedoms? Whose freedom is it? Answer the questions finally, all your insults I have already heard.

My system can't stand MSG either, but I do not want it legislated.

Some group here in Saskatchewan wants everybody to put a helmet on when they leave the house. Where does it end?

“Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do with the approval of their own conscience.”
C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock (Eerdmans)

If our food is so bad, why are we living longer than ever?

Some of the most toxic poisons out there are natures product, thanks to Gaia.

[ Naturally Occurring Toxins in Foods

Plants have developed more than 10,000 natural compounds that protect them against threats to their existence. A plant’s natural toxins are intended to guard against specific threats by predators or disease, such as hungry insects or damaging fungus.

Some of these toxins, produced naturally by plants, could cause illness in humans if they were concentrated at high levels and were consumed in large quantities. For example, potato plants contain the chemical solanine.

Another example of a natural toxicant is a poison called aflatoxin. It is produced by a mold that grows on grains, corn, peanuts and other nuts. If ingested in large amounts it is a potent liver toxin; it has been shown to be a liver carcinogen. Most American food processors have established rigorous programs to monitor the presence of aflatoxin. The FDA has set a maximum permissible level for aflatoxin at 20 parts per billion.] perdue ed

Ken, I keep asking, what do poisons in food (and air) have to do with individual freedoms?

Aaron - I think you'd have to provide some proof that MSG is used only as a wealth-producing additive. Your linking of the acid to wealth is questionable.

To my knowledge it can occur naturally in foods, e.g. in cheese, tomatoes, and as an additive is pervasive because of its enhancement of the flavours. I presume you are unable to eat those foods in which the acid occurs naturally.

But other people live their lives with severe allergies - to animals; to nuts; to various foods, eg, milk products, wheat; to synthetic fabrics; to various metals (eg, they can't purchase cheap watches or jewellery because they are allergic to nickel etc)...and it is unreasonable to legislate a common repression of these materials/animals/foods...because of the allergies of some individuals.

Living longer is interesting issue. It has to do with paying taxes and insurance premiums. But no one is worried what is the quality of that life.

OT

Personally I hate how rap haters have tried to usurp the term Hip Hop. They are one and the same, Hip Hop is rap and rap is Hip Hop. Hip Hop is not dance music or R&B.

ET, please educate yourself, I can't lecture you in this format.

Read any book that takes place a hundred or two hundred years ago and you will quickly realize that life was brutal back then.

Food quality was abysmal. Dysentery was common. Food poisoning occurred regularly.

Not only are we living longer, our quality of life, at ANY given age, is higher than it has ever been. Period. (thanks to science, not to [sic]latte liberal intellectuals)

But the Suzuki hyppie crowd wants the masses (not them) to forget our so-called "consumer lifestyle" and go backwards to those good old 'Utopian cave dweller days.

Aaron - I know this sounds harsh, but stop navel gazing. You are not the first person on the planet to suffer. Educate yourself on what is safe for you to eat and move on. It is difficult, but not impossible.

As for why you must suffer, it’s preferable to others starving. And no, I am not being facetious. If you object to agribusinesses, such as Emerald BioAgriculture, providing farmers with means to enhance yield and quality, then you need to come up with more than “it hurts me” arguments. Effectively, it requires that everyone’s misery must be equal.

Your belief that I advocate MSG in foods derives entirely from your imagination.

Tenebris, I am glad you finally came up with collectivist point. One after another you folks are showing your true colours.

Next, MSG use in agriculture is quite limited, if I am not mistaken it is sprayed on strawberries and grapes in some areas. What it has to with discussion is really not clear.

I did not even mention agribusiness anywhere here. It's food industry that I have beef with. Is it clear now?

Still waiting for reasoning why MSG must be forced into everyone's food instead of being sold like any other spice for the true connoisseurs, and what does it have to do with individual freedoms.

Aaron

As far as I can see it you are grossly exaggerating. You are not being "poisoned" by some dude smoking in the evening. You are simply inconvenienced and decided to conveniently play the "second hand smoke" card brought to you by you friendly neighbourhood socialists. Grow-up and be a man and admit YOU JUST DON'T LIKE IT, and quit trying to make yours an ethical or a moral high ground argument; it's not, it\s whining.

I like to burn tires in the front yard. Not like starting huge fire, but small pieces, in controlled environment.

The eternal problem...

Proverbs, third chapter, verses 4 and 5.

Sigh.

Aaron, you pixilated primate, you do not even have the benefit of consistency, and your difficulties in comprehension would stun a Democrat.

OK, rewind: Are most fresh, unprocessed, foods a problem for you, yes or no? If no, then your problem is with processed foods.

You can live a very enjoyable and fulfilling life even if you have to avoid processed foods.

Now, put down that can-opener before you hurt yourself.

Tenebris, I'll repeat the question that I asked earlier and had not heard an answer to:

While I am tending to the garden and cooking for the family all day long, are you going to support us financially?

If you can't answer that question, try this one: what makes you insist MSG is added to the processed foods?

MSG sucks as a food additive, it keeps me up all night, and I despise any restaurant that puts it in their food without telling me first.

Related to this discussion, one thing I have observed today is that too many people have too much money, and most of these people don't give a damn if their actions make someone else miserable.

So when a tattooed grease ball with no brains pulls up beside me in a $20k Harley at a red light, and his motor is so loud that my kids have to cover their ears even with the car windows shut, what can one do but hope that the government regulates the noise?

And I wonder too if I will have to pay for said idiot's hearing aid when he is older.

Raising the standard of living for everyone in society will inevitably lead to more nanny state intervention simply because many people are stupid inconsiderate asses.

As the old saying goes, it only takes a few to wreck things for many.

Oops! that should be Proverbs 26, verses 4 and 5...

...verse 3 too.

Aaron, MSG is a flavour-enhancer...this "poison" is put in food to add flavour. That's one of your questions answered.

According to Wikipedia, the health concerns are apparently minimal to non-existant for the vast majority of the population. You are apparently one of the very few who are, essentially, allergic to MSG. Speaking as one with two life-threatening/life-shortening conditions, sucks to be you (and me).

Unfortunately for you, the flavour-enhancement of the very many outweigh the allergies of the very few.

Stop being a collectivist, nanny-stater and demanding that SOMEONE do SOMETHING about this. Be a stoic, self-reliant conservative kinda guy and either "suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune or take arms against a sea of troubles". That is, either:

- suck it up and quite whining; or
- start a petition and campaign for its control.

I (and other SDAers) might even support you and sign the petition.

Now, I imagine that THAT is quite enough for the topic of MSG (on Kate's dime).

Eeyore: I'll repeat the question, left unanswered by your colleagues. Why do you insist everyone has to eat taste-enhanced foods? Do those people know what it is doing to them, i.e. why they are obese, why they have muscle and joint pain, why they have rashes and lesions, why their kids are hyper and ADD?

I don't blame you - I too was thinking the same thing: they are krazy kooks, until it crippled me.

The real question, Aaron, is scientific.

Is there any non-disputable scientific proof that MSG, which is a 'taste enhancer', is a cause of those ailments which you cite: obesity, muscle/joint problems; ADD, rashes and lesions?

To my understanding, Asian cultures have used it extensively for many years; do they have these effects? Are all such symptoms as noted above, due to and only to MSG?

I certainly accept that people can have allergic reactions to it, just as many people cannot tolerate other foodstuffs. I would also agree that such people require careful labelling of packaged foods and must move to a diet that uses less processed and packaged foods. This is valid for many people with dietary restrictions, and this is met by those individuals - not by requiring the govt to ban all such foods.

Vote for the QOTW by Aaron @ 2PM.."ET please educate yourself, I can't lecture you in this format." Leave yer lecturin' to yerself Aaron and just try to engage in fair and balanced debate with a minimum of cussin.

Dear Kate,

Call us when the shuttle lands, you moron.

Sincerely,

Planet Earth

Dear Kate,

Call us when the shuttle lands, you moron.

Sincerely,

Planet Earth

It's nice to be idealistic, but the truth is that if the government didn't insist that manufacturers label the ingredients in their food, many wouldn't.

If the government didn't pass rules banning smoking on airlines, most airlines would still permit it.

If the government didn't have a rule that says you cannot throw out used motor oil in your regular garbage, many people would.

Etc.

I have not heard any convincing arguments that suggest that if the government were to disappear, the free market would adequately address these issues - although I would certainly be interested in any such ideas if they are credible.

I'm all for the smallest and most efficient government possible, and one that generally stays out of the way. But when given freedom and money, not all people behave intelligently, and the capitalist system has no qualms about exploiting their lack of intelligence.

"Why do you insist everyone has to eat taste-enhanced foods?"

Such obtuseness is positively unnatural.

Aaron – There’s no MSG in a potato. Either learn to cook, or stop eating.

"In a time of galloping nanny-statism, the prospect of a society purged of bureaucracy seems less threat than romance"

Funny.

Canada's New Conservative Government grew the bureaucracy and year over year federal spending by the largest amount in the history of the nation over the past four years.

Now THAT'S even funnier.

Do you hate the State? by Murray Rothbard .

Originally published in The Libertarian Forum, Vol. 10, No. 7, July 1977.
I have been ruminating recently on what are the crucial questions that divide libertarians. Some that have received a lot of attention in the last few years are: anarcho-capitalism vs. limited government, abolitionism vs. gradualism, natural rights vs. utilitarianism, and war vs. peace. But I have concluded that as important as these questions are, they don’t really cut to the nub of the issue, of the crucial dividing line between us.

Well said, TJ, and right on topic. That is precisely why anarchism as a political philosophy is untenable. Too many stupid people…and too many evil ones.

Aaron, you couldn't get away from MSG even if you tried. MSG is just a monosodium salt of glutamic acid which is present in huge concentrations in tissues as it is a common point for a lot of amino acid transformations and it also serves as an excitatory neurotransmitter in the brain. Glutamate levels are high enough in neurons that you can see the glutamate peaks on NMR imaging of the brain.

There is a distinct taste receptor which detects only the presence of glutamate in food. How people percieve glutamate is individual; to me it tastes like meat but other people percieve it differently. High glutamate foods are preferred as they indicate a high source of protein which might explain why we have a taste receptor specifically for glutamate.

I have yet to see one person who has a true MSG sensitivity. I think that the vast majority of people of claim they are sensitive to MSG have made a causal connection between an unrelated illness that came on shortly after they ate Chinese food. Not one of the patients I've seen with "MSG sensitivity" has agreed to undergo double blind testing to see if they really can tell if they've gotten MSG or not. I suspect the results would be the same as with the bogus diagnosis of "multiple chemical sensitivity" (usually depression in people who can't admit they might possibly be depressed). Double blind studies of people with "multiple chemical sensitivity" have shown that these people can't tell the dangerous chemical they supposedly react to from placebo when they are exposed under laboratory conditions.

Glutamate is not an essential amino acid as the body can easily make it from other amino acids and Krebs cycle intermediates. Taking glutamate, which is quite a common amino acid, out of food would be a momentous task and I can't think of anything highly more processed than "glutamate free food". Why anyone would want to do this mystifies me.

http://www.truthinlabeling.org/
There seems to be a difference twixt natural amino acid and Added.

> I certainly accept that people can have allergic reactions to it

Is that why I should not be allowed to opt out?

"Now, like water claiming ownership of "dry", the crazier among them have declared themselves "anarchists". Anarchists!"

this drives me f:)cking crazy.

i saw a wolverine once in my life, backpacking around Ram River near Nordegg a few years ago. he saw us and ran away. he wanted to be left alone...

...i like wolverines.

"In a time of galloping nanny-statism, the prospect of a society purged of bureaucracy seems less threat than romance".

nothing wrong with a little romance, right?

shoot for the stars, and you'll hit the moon. not bad.

Never mind the Rottweilers. I read stuff like that crapulOcious blog and I want a wolverine. A big f-ing wolverine with a 12 gage on his back. Gawd.

Anarchy is what you have with one guy on a deserted island. Perfect, unregulated individuality. More than one and they either come to an arrangement or go back to one guy plus some shallow graves. This is human nature, and is WELL supported in the archaeological record to times before our pre-human ancestors started keeping the fire in the same place in the cave every night.

Monkeys don't even have anarchy, for crap sakes. Grow a FRICKING BRAIN!!!

Now, up above somebody said Somalia is an anarchy. No. Somalia is trapped in a state of primitive warfare being waged with modern weapons. Hard to have personal freedom whilst starving to death and dodging warlords, drug gangs and freaky Arab jihadists eh?

What Somalia is, is uncivilized. Barbaric. In need of being f-ing well conquered and straightened out by Victoria's Empire. Pity the Brits p1ssed it all away, eh?

Now they're left to do it the desert island method. Which is CRAP, man.

If you've got to have some kind of social structure (and we do, its frigin' genetic) have one that by God works. Western Civilization, baby! Its the bomb.

Now where's my FRICKIN' wolverine, damnit.

Aaron will most likely die by geing hit by a bus while walking across the street with his ipod ear phones securely in place whilst listening to Yanni or self-hypnosis recordings, and holding a can of soda made out of aluminum (aluminum is far more dangerous for everyone than MSG-more than enough scientific evidence-University of Calgary leads the research in this area-to prove its contribution/cause to Alzheimer's). The neighbour exercising his right to smoke, and the poison MSG in the food supply will no longer matter.

Do a google search: ALCAN Alzheimer's society donations - you will be very surprised at what you come up with.

"The left's list of illegitimately co-opted words"

Bingo!

PiperPaul, now in Montreal, and loving it (Get Smart, anyone?)

Kate, if smoking tobacco is an individual right, than is smoking crack too? Or is injecting heroin a right? I smell hypocrisy, can you clarify your position?

@me thinks: Holding a can of soda? You gotta be kidding. Aspartic acid attaches to the same receptors as glutamic acid and in the same manner. Even non-diet pop contains aspartame or other sugar substitutes, so what makes you think that I would ever drink pop? What a puffed-up dork you are dude - when you assume, you make an ass of you and me.

I have only one use for pop - PC Cola is very good and cheap blueing solution, I use it on the knives and gun parts.

"Government that is big enough to give you all
you want is big enough to take it all away."
-- Barry Goldwater