One of my old roommates from graduate school writes a blog that I, now an ex-pat living in France, find very informative because it keeps me up to date on certain aspects of the news and culture of the US. Paul Bauer, PB, now a lawyer living in Milwaukee, is a delightful writer, which might be surprising since he graduated with a PhD in English from the notorious Duke English Department led by Stanley Fish. I recall one day PB bringing home the Sunday New York Times; he liked to do the crossword puzzle. On the cover of the magazine section was his advisor Frank Lentricchia. In those days PB, although not as radical as most in the English Department, was certainly liberal, and if I recall correctly, would always vote for the Democrats, including astonishingly voting one year for Jesse Jackson in the North Carolina Democratic Primary. I readNational Review and believed in Reagan, if not the Republican Party. He has admitted I was instrumental in making him a Republican, in part by introducing him to National Review, but mostly by engaging in conversations. (Apparently actually having discussions about first principles and evidence for political positions wasn’t something that happened very often in the liberal arts at Duke.)

Anyway, in spite of his sterling record, his new political views were insurmountable hurdles to his bid to obtain a permanent postion in the highly competetive world of academia. (He tells the story of announcing to a hiring committee at a major university that he would like to teach Whittaker Chambers’ Witness as literature… you get the picture.) Thus, he went to law school and became a solid Republican and, much later, a Catholic. Now I cannot open National Review and write for LRC so my own evolution should be well understood.

Early during the last election cycle PB was writing about the Republican field and described Ron Paul as “weird.” I called him on this adjective so after some study PB wrote a fair assessment of Ron’s views. Below is my response to that post. I send this article to LRC now in support of the Lew’s wonderful post on Ron Paul’s new Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Dear Paul,

Thanks for your comments on Ron Paul. What you have shown after even a brief study is that his views are not those of a politician, but of someone who has studied the philosophy and history of economics and government, and has come to form to a consistent set of positions across the spectrum of issues and throughout his career. I would like to point to a couple of quotes in a very general response to your misgivings about his positions on foreign policy.

Paul bases his positions on government policy, including foreign policy, on the premise that this institution made up of men should be held to the same moral principles as individuals and their other organizations. So my first quote you should recognize comes from November of 2010.

When I used to teach English a million years ago, I taught my students that pretty much everything you need to know about the novel and what it is supposed to be about you can learn from the central moment of Middlemarch where, after hundreds of pages in which the reader comes to loathe the dried-up old pedant, Casaubon, whom the wonderful young heroine, Dorothea Brooke, has unaccountably married in a fit of misplaced intellectual romanticism, the narrator (the Wise Woman, i.e., Eliot herself), turns to the reader and asks, “But what about Casaubon?  Does he not have dreams, feelings, hopes, pains? Put yourself in his shoes, dear reader.”   I’m paraphrasing, but the effect is thrilling and almost heartbreaking.    Middlemarch makes the reader confront what it means to be a moral person – the ability to view other people as things-in-themselves and not as means-to-an-end, to accord even the most unattractive character the dignity and human consideration all are due.

Are we not treating Iran like a Casaubon? Are not the people of Iran things-in-themselves and not as means-to-an-end. I thought you have eloquently affirmed the Golden Rule, and that is what Paul is declaring should be the basis of our foreign policy. Ridiculous, certainly not Christian concepts, such as the US is the indispensible nation, that we not only have the right, but the power and special insight, to destroy and make societies in our own image are false propaganda tools in the lust for empire.

The second quote from William Buckley points to a key reason why we should resist this drive for empire. Writing in the early 50s he wrote that “We have to accept Big Government for the duration – for neither an offensive nor a defensive war can be waged given our present government skills except through the instrumentality of a totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores.” Buckley went on to recommend that we support “large armies and air forces, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards and the attendant centralization of power in Washington.” In my own retrospect, I doubt if much of what was done to create and fight the cold war was justified. But I have not had the slightest doubt that totalitarian bureaucracy formed on our shores to fight the war on terror is dangerous and evil in every way and is reason enough to change our foreign policy.

One last note on economic policy. To allow for a transition Paul’s policy proposal is for allowing competing currencies a la Hayek; specifically to allow Americans to make contracts and exchanges in any medium of exchange they desire (e.g., gold). This would drive out of circulation the worthless Federal Reserve Notes and would make abolishing the FED a fait accompli.

Recently by Ira Katz: Evil in Fact and Fiction

My brother died Saturday.

Stan was only 52 years old, but he lived his life well. This statement may seem odd to those who know some of his story in that he has been arrested more than once, he had not worked for almost two decades and he did not do much more than play tennis and watch sports.

Stan was an extremely brilliant student. He took calculus in high school at the nearby technical university. At Clemson University, he majored in electrical engineering and premed. He had all A’s with the exception of a B from a graduate student teaching English. Of course she was extremely left wing and had assigned some social purpose to giving him a lower grade than he deserved. He did not miss a single question on a homework assignment or a test in organic chemistry. After graduating with the highest honors he entered the MD/PhD program at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston (MUSC). His thesis work on shock using an isolated rabbit lung was published in the Journal of Applied Physiology (Katz et al, JAP, 1988 v65, pp. 1301-1306).

It was during his graduate work at MUSC that the first symptoms of bipolar disorder occurred. After one major incident he seemed to be stable for several years. He again completed his MD/PhD with the highest honors and then completed his medical internship at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. After doing well there he entered the residency program of the Neurology Department. He was destined for a great career in academic medicine. But it was not to be. He suffered several relapses and then restarts to his career at many different hospitals around the country. We have described this history and much more in a book we wrote together. It was a learning experience even for me to read his insightful descriptions of the illness that devastated his personal life and stunted his career. Finally, after years of turmoil he only concentrated on staying healthy as part of the simple life I alluded to above.

Eight months ago he began to suffer from continuing stomach pain. He thought he had developed an ulcer. After several weeks of this problem, where standard ulcer treatments were ineffective, a CT scan was taken. It revealed a massive tumor on his pancreas. There really was nothing that could be done as the tumor had already invaded his arteries making it inoperable. Unfortunately he underwent radiation and chemotherapy even though I do not think they ever had a chance of being successful in any way. He suffered greatly. He told me a couple of weeks ago, "I am hungry but I cannot eat. I am thirsty but I cannot drink." At the end he was literally skin, yellowed with jaundice, and bones; but was as comfortable as possible through the diligence and care of my other brother and his wife at their home where he died.

I was and will always be very, very proud of my brother for his well-lived life. Well-lived because in the face of these enormous challenges and disappointments he was always a kind and gentle person to everyone, and who in his own way exemplified heroic courage.

I thank Lew Rockwell for allowing me to express these sentiments on his website. But I can add more to the story that is related to many recent themes on LRC, specifically psychiatry, Big Pharma, and the power of the police.

In our book we wrote at length about psychiatrists and their modern tools, so called mood stabilizing drugs. We were cautionary in a philosophical way, without directly attacking them. In fact we were scared to write what we really thought. He continued to see psychiatrists and take the medications even though he did not believe in their efficacy. In fact, he thought they were certainly doing him harm. Lithium had already destroyed his thyroid. He also had to live with drug-induced tremor that made it difficult for him to hold a soup spoon or to sign his name. Why would he be afraid to say, except to me, that his psychiatric medical treatment was not only ineffective, but was hurting him? Because then he would be in danger of being labeled noncompliant and thrown in jail if any future incident occurred. The police had once come for him in the middle of the night so he had reason to be afraid of them.

Stan and I had both read many scientific articles related to these drugs. There were the years of experience with virtually all of the drugs and more than a dozen psychiatrists to form our opinions. It was only slightly gratifying, because it is still such a long way before the situation has really changed, to see a mainstream source begin to question psychiatry the way we did. I am speaking of the book reviews by Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, in the New York Review of Books (here and here) that restated the fundamental fallacies of the field.

This is very relevant if you consider Stan had absolutely none of the risk factors for pancreatic cancer. Furthermore, if you knew that one of the medications he felt forced to take was valproic acid, marketed as Depakote by Abbott Laboratories. Medline, a website sponsored by the National Institutes of Health, gives the following warning, "Valproic acid may cause serious or life-threatening damage to the pancreas. This may occur at any time during your treatment." It is my opinion that taking this drug for almost two decades was the likely cause of his cancer. I have searched the literature but have not found longitudinal studies on the risks or benefits of this treatment. I think Stan must have been one of the early cohorts to start using it as the Psychiatric Department at the University of Texas at San Antonio where he had been treated did many early clinical studies. Stan was even featured in the Abbott stockholders magazine. If you or someone you care about is taking this medication I would certainly investigate the dangers.

Thanks again to Lew for allowing me to praise my brother; may he rest in peace.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

The Best of Ira Katz

Last Sunday evening in prime time the major French network France2 aired the recent Roman Polanski film The Ghost Writer. I doubt a similar airing would occur on an American TV network because of the negative view of Polanski in the U.S. and the theme of this film. It is the second point that is the topic of this article.

The Ghost Writer begins with a ferry arriving on the Massachusetts coast from an offshore island (a fictional version of Martha's Vineyard) with vehicles passing around an apparently abandoned SUV. The next image is of a body washed up on the island. The corpse was of the ghost writer for the memoirs of an ex-Prime Minister of the U.K. After this accident/suicide another ghost writer is recruited. The trouble begins even before the new writer arrives back at his apartment in London after receiving a copy of the manuscript, as it is purposely stolen. Polanski builds the suspense as the writer goes to the island compound to work on the book. The Blair-like ex-Prime Minister is holed up in the U.S. because he is being accused of war crimes associated with torturing suspected terrorists. As this is not a movie review, I will directly give away key plot points to introduce the subject of this article. There are several murders, including the ghost writer and the ex-prime minister, all to cover up the fact that this prime minister was controlled by the CIA through his wife. She was controlled and recruited into the agency by a Harvard professor who had made contacts with the English elite as a Fulbright Scholar at Cambridge University after graduating from Yale. It seems Polanski and Robert Harris, the co-author of the screen play, had been reading Carroll Quigley; or at least LRC.

Twenty, perhaps even ten-years-ago, I would have dismissed such a plot as unrealistic, where a conspiratorial clique within the government commits the highest crimes without second thoughts and with seeming impunity. Now I believe it is the most likely scenario to explain how the government really works. Consider the following recent posts on LRC.

An absolute must view is the presentation by Jesse Trentadue on the death of his brother Kenneth at the hands of the Federal authorities after the Oklahoma City bombing, the cover up of this murder, and his 17-year battle against the utterly corrupt and ill named Justice Department. What could only have been accomplished through sheer will power of epic proportions, Trentadue has uncovered the story of vast conspiracies within several government agencies that goes well beyond the case of mistaken identity that cost his brother his life. It also becomes clear how unimaginative are the minds of the bureaucrats that rule us, as they always use the same lame excuse of a prison suicide for so many convenient (for them) prison deaths.

Dr. Donald Miller discusses with Lew on a podcast the Kennedy assassinations; JFK, RFK, and even JFK Jr. The sheer mendacity of the whitewashing of facts and crimes is astounding; or would be if not for my years of reading LRC and other internet sites that now document these atrocities.

Another recent item that you could not makeup concerns military experiments uncovered by a professor at a St. Louis community college. It seems that in the 50s during the height of the cold war, army scientists secretly sprayed St. Louis with ‘radioactive’ particles for years to test chemical warfare technology. They chose as their primary guinea pigs the residents of a government housing project. The poor residents should have known that they were the subjects of a cruel social science experiment, even if they would not discover until decades later, if they survived, of the cruel military experiment.

I really liked this clip of a Washington policy wonk giving a short history of American enabling incidents; i.e., false-flag incidents or policies invoked to induce a response as an excuse for war. His message, these dishonest, unconstitutional, and immoral tactics really work, they have been applied to virtually all American wars, and we should now apply them to Iran.

Any and all of the alphabet soup of agencies can and will abuse power, from the obvious gross evils of the CIA, FBI, ATF, TSA, and IRS, to say nothing of the Pentagon; but I am sure if investigated properly one could find murder at all levels and departments. Look at how the Department of Agriculture raids farmers with the temerity to sell unpasteurized milk. In his imitable fashion Will Grigg recently described how the Forest Service was involved in the murder of a California man 20 years ago to gain control of his land. Have they been purchasing hollow point bullets like the rest of the agencies in the Federal bureaucracy? And of course it goes on through the state and local level governments. As Grigg regularly documents and as Peter Hitchens has eloquently stated, the police now serve the state, and not the people.

What to take away from this litany in fact and fiction, set any group in society apart to perform a function, with powers predicated on violence, and it will eventually lead to the type of abuses recounted here. In other words, always beware of the state, don't believe their lies.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

The Best of Ira Katz

Dear LRC Readers,

I was privileged to recently attend the Ludwig von Mises Institute Supporters Summit held in Vienna, Austria. John Denson's presentation on the history of the founding of the Mises Institute in Auburn that resulted from the foresight, persistence, and courage of Lew Rockwell, was the highlight of the talks for me. I also very much enjoyed and was inspired listening to individuals from various countries who have started there own local Mises Institutes, that Helio Beltrão of Brazil has described the process as being like a starfish. Of course Vienna is the home of the Austrian School of Economics. A special treat for me was the walking tour of the sites of Mises' life including his school, the neo-Gothic Akademisches Gymnasium, and the art deco chamber of commerce building where he worked. The tour ended at a cafe where Jeffery Tucker performed songs of the Mises Circle. The final talk by Professor Hans Hermann Hoppe described his preference for Mises over Friedrich Hayek. Hoppe read several damaging quotes by Hayek that compromised his free market credentials to the extent that Hoppe called Hayek a social democrat!

During the singing at the cafe I tended to stay near the bar (be assured this is no critique of the performance of Mr. Tucker, but only a reflection of my yearning for beer after the two-hour walk) where a conversation ensued. The discussion echoed Hoppe's remarks but in this case we compared Mises to Murray Rothbard. The conversation was initiated by the fact that a Belgian student present had been among the founders of a Murray Rothbard Institute. The consensus around the table was that the Mises Institute might more accurately be called the Rothbard Institute. Obviously there is very much the same in the thought of these two great economists, but what differentiates them? I think most would say that Mises was more of a minarchist compared to the pure anarcho-capitalism of Rothbard. For example, Mises retained a fondness for the Hapsburgs all his life.

While I agree with this differentiation in terms of the role of government, in my view it is more instructive to examine their differences as a matter of culture. Rothbard was somewhat of a cosmopolitan libertarian in that there was no specific culture via place, religion, etc. that he is associated with. On the other hand Mises was a cultural libertarian in that he was very much reflected the old Vienna before WWI. The cultural background of Mises was beautifully and tenderly depicted by his friend, the old Austrian intellectual Erik Ritter von Kuehnelt-Leddihn. Walking the streets of Vienna, seeing the churches and other the buildings, the historical plaques everywhere; eating the wiener schnitzel, strudels and spätzle; drinking the coffee, beer and wine, catching wafts of waltzes one recognizes a distinctive culture. I was exceptionally impressed by Mises' school and the curriculum it offered in classical languages and thinking. Attending at the same time as Mises (b. 1881), who I consider the greatest economist, was Erwin Schrödinger, (b. 1887, physicist, Nobel laureate for physics in 1933) who was put in a group just below Newton and Einstein, in a ranking by Lev Landau, as one of the greatest physicists. Others who attended the school at the same time (between ages 10-18) were Paul Ehrenfest, (b. 1880, world class physicist and mathematician, friend of Einstein and Bohr), Hans Kelsen, (b. 1881, constitutional lawyer, author of the Austrian Constitution), Lise Meitner, (b. 1878, world class physicist), and Richard von Mises, (b. 1883, younger brother of Ludwig, world class applied mathematician, early member of the Vienna Circle, he developed the distortion energy theory of stress that I learned as an undergraduate engineering student). In Vienna at the same time were giants of literature and music, for example Stefan Zweig (b. 1881) and Arnold Schoenberg (b. 1874, though his music is not my cup of tea), respectively. The meetings were held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences, and the talks themselves in a beautiful room where we learned that Böhm-Bawerk had lectured. Just across from this building are plaques dedicated to the mathematician and philosopher Leibniz (in 1712, he began a two-year residence in Vienna, where he was appointed Imperial Court Councilor to the Habsburgs) and the composer Schubert (b. 1797 in Vienna).

In summary, the Viennese culture in which Mises was raised and matured was something of immense value and worth protecting. That culture was integrally related to the Hapsburgs, so it is not surprising that Mises was not aggressively against that particular government. The US government of 1789 is surely much different than the one of 2011 regarding liberty and culture. LRC is filled with articles that depict the current government's active attack on deviations to the dominant corporatist culture. As a libertarian I necessarily am more opposed to the hostile government of today than I would have been to that of the founders.

Among those around the table that evening where a Randian objectivist, a Mormon, a Roman Catholic and a Jewish convert to Catholicism from Iceland, Croatia, Belgium, and US via France. With these various backgrounds and profound cultural disagreements I think we all would strongly agree that libertarianism is the economic/political philosophy founded on the principles of nonviolence and property rights that best facilitates cultural development and coexistence. In a particular place or time an individual libertarian might feel more or less strongly against his government.

I have written occasionally for LRC, however, this was the first event associated with the Mises Institute that I had ever attended. My connection to the Austrian School began more than 20 years ago when I had recently finished my PhD in mechanical engineering but wanted to learn something about economics as the predictions from the profession were obviously so faulty. I had observed that if an engineer had made predictions of the same poor quality he would be charged with malfeasance, or at least would not find much work. Yet the statures of the government economists never were challenged even though they were so consistently wrong. At that time I had made a friendship with an elderly woman who lived close to the university. While visiting her in her apartment I noticed a book with the subtitle "A Treatise on Economics." My friend noticed my interest and offered to lend it to me. She said she had been a good friend of the author. So the first economics book I had ever read was Mises' Human Action. Later she gave me a first edition that I like to think was handed to her by Ludwig himself such that I am directly in the line of Mises as an adherent of the Austrian School. Now, after being in Vienna with other Miseans, that feeling is even stronger.

Best wishes, IK

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

The Best of Ira Katz

Recently by Ira Katz: Edgar Allan Poe and the Purloined Social Science

Virtually every minute of every day the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is committing the serious crimes of arbitrary search and seizure (a hunt by law enforcement officials for property or communications believed to be evidence of crime, and the act of taking possession of this property) and assault (an act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact). I contend every minute because international airports that have flights to the US have also been forced to implement TSA procedures. For me, an expat living in France, the formerly cheerful anticipation flying back home is now perceived with dread. My recent trip through the Dallas, Denver and Orlando airports was typically awful, but with what I found to be another crime. In the spirit of Betty Akers I will describe what transpired below.

I travelled to Denver for a conference where I had purchased a small (perhaps less than 100 ml) snow globe with a buffalo in it as a gift for my three-year-old daughter. It was in my luggage when I passed through security in Denver for a flight to Orlando. Leaving Orlando for New York for a connection to Paris the globe was identified on the scanner and confiscated. I was politely offered to check my bag, but waiting another 30 minutes to go through security again is not a real option. So the little snow globe souvenir was gone. Luckily I had also bought a book for my little one.

This admittedly small incident I believe accurately reflects the stupidity and inconsistency of the TSA. Traveling is inconvenienced, often to a great extent because Blair's government ginned up a case against a supposed cell planning to use liquids to make a bomb. We must take off our shoes because of a single attempted shoe bomb that failed. We must go through porno scanners and be groped because of a single attempted underwear bomb that failed. These were the thoughts passing through my mind as I gathered up my belongings in Orlando, sans my daughter's buffalo, when I spotted a stand with a stack of TSA Customer Comment Cards that cheerfully stated that the agency wants you to "Help us improve our customer service by completing and returning this card to a TSA drop box, to a TSA supervisor or by mail."

CUSTOMER! This is a complete disfiguration of the word customer, which, as Orwell taught, is a grave crime when put to the service of state power. This use is akin to a slave owner calling his chattel employees. A customer is a person who purchases goods or services from another. The appropriate word is victim, a person who suffers from a destructive or injurious action or agency. Now I am sure travelers could complete reams of victim comment cards. The cards ask the victim to provide their name and contact information. It is likely that the comment card is simply a ploy to have on file the names of trouble makers.

My trip back to France was without further incident. But I can tell you, traveling by train is much more enjoyable.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

The Best of Ira Katz

First of all it is a wonderful story. A minister, D, in post-Napoleonic France (the story was published in 1844) has stolen a letter from an "exalted personage" that gives him a great political advantage at court. The Prefect of Police, G, has been called onto the case and works in total secrecy. During the nights when the minister is away from his home the Prefect and his men "scientifically" search for the letter. The meticulous search includes the dismantling of all of the furniture and fixtures in the house. But the search fails to find the letter that for good reason the Prefect is sure is easily at hand and located in that house. The Prefect has come to Dupin to explain his predicament and to ask for advice. A month after his first visit G returns in desperation, there is a very large reward involved, to appeal to Dupin for help to the tune of 50,000 francs. It turns out that this Minister D is an old rival of Dupin’s. Some critics have hypothesized he may even be Dupin’s brother. It also appears that Dupin favors the opposite faction at court from D. Thus Dupin tells the Prefect to write the check immediately as he produces the letter. After the amazed Prefect departs Dupin explains to the narrator how he came to obtain the letter. In fact it was in full view in the most obvious place, the letter rack. Dupin slipped a replica in its place after distracting the minister via a diversion in the street he had instigated.

Poe certainly had economic opinions regarding making a living as a writer. A whole book has been written on this topic (Edgar Allan Poe and the Masses: The Political Economy of Literature in Antebellum America, available for free at Google Books). But I cannot comment on his political and economic philosophy if he had one. However, beyond the story itself, eloquent libertarian and Austrian economic insights are to be found in The Purloined Letter.

In the following paragraph Dupin comments on the character of the Prefect, whom he calls at one point "this functionary." Is this not a great word for a policeman or any other government employee?

“For its practical value it depends upon this,” replied Dupin; and the Prefect and his cohort fall so frequently, first, by default of this identification, and, secondly, by ill-admeasurement, or rather through non-admeasurement, of the intellect with which they are engaged. They consider only their own ideas of ingenuity; and, in searching for anything hidden, advert only to the modes in which they would have hidden it. They are right in this much — that their own ingenuity is a faithful representative of that of the mass; but when the cunning of the individual felon is diverse in character from their own, the felon foils them, of course. This always happens when it is above their own, and very usually when it is below. They have no variation of principle in their investigations; at best, when urged by some unusual emergency — by some extraordinary reward — they extend or exaggerate their old modes of practice, without touching their principles. What, for example, in this case of D — , has been done to vary the principle of action? What is all this boring, and probing, and sounding, and scrutinizing with the microscope, and dividing the surface of the building into registered square inches — what is it all but an exaggeration of the application of the one principle or set of principles of search, which are based upon the one set of notions regarding human ingenuity, to which the Prefect, in the long routine of his duty, has been accustomed? Do you not see he has taken it for granted that all men proceed to conceal a letter, — not exactly in a gimlet-hole bored in a chair-leg — but, at least, in some hole or corner suggested by the same tenor of thought which would urge a man to secrete a letter in a gimlet-hole bored in a chair-leg? And do you not see also, that such recherches nooks for concealment are adapted only for ordinary occasions, and would be adopted only by ordinary intellects; for, in all cases of concealment, a disposal of the article concealed — a disposal of it in this recherch manner, — is, in the very first instance, presumable and presumed; and thus its discovery depends, not at all upon the acumen, but altogether upon the mere care, patience, and determination of the seekers; and where the case is of importance — or, what amounts to the same thing in the policial eyes, when the reward is of magnitude, — the qualities in question have never been known to fall. You will now understand what I meant in suggesting that, had the purloined letter been hidden anywhere within the limits of the Prefect’s examination — in other words, had the principle of its concealment been comprehended within the principles of the Prefect — its discovery would have been a matter altogether beyond question. This functionary, however, has been thoroughly mystified; and the remote source of his defeat lies in the supposition that the Minister is a fool, because he has acquired renown as a poet. All fools are poets; this the Prefect feels; and he is merely guilty of a non distributio medii in thence inferring that all poets are fools.”

Dupin comments that functionaries like G "consider only their own ideas of ingenuity; and, in searching for anything hidden, advert only to the modes in which they would have hidden it." Here is a clear anticipation of the Fatal Conceit described so well by Hayek, whereby the elitist government bureaucrats take the power to tell the people how to live. The immorality aside, the information problems insure the consistent failure of these schemes. Dupin continues his critique of the Prefect.

“But is this really the poet?” I asked. “There are two brothers, I know; and both have attained reputation in letters. The Minister I believe has written learnedly on the Differential Calculus. He is a mathematician, and no poet.”

“You are mistaken; I know him well; he is both. As poet and mathematician, he would reason well; as mere mathematician, he could not have reasoned at all, and thus would have been at the mercy of the Prefect.”

“You surprise me,” I said, “by these opinions, which have been contradicted by the voice of the world. You do not mean to set at naught the well-digested idea of centuries. The mathematical reason has long been regarded as the reason par excellence.

“‘Il y a a parier,’” replied Dupin, quoting from Chamfort, “‘que toute idee publique, toute convention recue, est une sottise, car elle a convenu au plus grand nombre.’ The mathematicians, I grant you, have done their best to promulgate the popular error to which you allude, and which is none the less an error for its promulgation as truth. With an art worthy a better cause, for example, they have insinuated the term ‘analysis’ into application to algebra. The French are the originators of this particular deception; but if a term is of any importance — if words derive any value from applicability — then ‘analysis’ conveys ‘algebra’ about as much as, in Latin, ‘ambitus’ implies ‘ambition,’ ‘religio’ religion or ‘homines honesti,’ a set of honorable men.”

“You have a quarrel on hand, I see,” said I, “with some of the algebraists of Paris; but proceed.”

“I dispute the availability, and thus the value, of that reason which is cultivated in any especial form other than the abstractly logical. I dispute, in particular, the reason educed by mathematical study. The mathematics are the science of form and quantity; mathematical reasoning is merely logic applied to observation upon form and quantity. The great error lies in supposing that even the truths of what is called pure algebra, are abstract or general truths. And this error is so egregious that I am confounded at the universality with which it has been received. Mathematical axioms are not axioms of general truth. What is true of relation — of form and quantity — is often grossly false in regard to morals, for example. In this latter science it is very usually untrue that the aggregated parts are equal to the whole. In chemistry also the axiom falls. In the consideration of motive it falls; for two motives, each of a given value, have not, necessarily, a value when united, equal to the sum of their values apart. There are numerous other mathematical truths which are only truths within the limits of relation. But the mathematician argues, from his finite truths, through habit, as if they were of an absolutely general applicability — as the world indeed imagines them to be. Bryant, in his very learned ‘Mythology,’ mentions an analogous source of error, when he says that ‘although the Pagan fables are not believed, yet we forget ourselves continually, and make inferences from them as existing realities.’ With the algebraists, however, who are Pagans themselves, the ‘Pagan fables’ are believed, and the inferences are made, not so much through lapse of memory, as through an unaccountable addling of the brains. In short, I never yet encountered the mere mathematician who could be trusted out of equal roots, or one who did not clandestinely hold it as a point of his faith that x squared + px was absolutely and unconditionally equal to q. Say to one of these gentlemen, by way of experiment, if you please, that you believe occasions may occur where x squared + px is not altogether equal to q, and, having made him understand what you mean, get out of his reach as speedily as convenient, for, beyond doubt, he will endeavor to knock you down.

Here the argument precedes those of von Mises that the proper methodology for many applications is not mathematical. Though economics is not mentioned specifically by Poe, he has Dupin give the example of morals which is a branch of praxeology as is economics. He thus recognizes that branches of science, the so-called social sciences, which study human actions, are not susceptible to mathematical calculation. If he were alive today Poe would surely have recognized that the mathematicians (or modelers) have taken over such that economics is a purloined social science.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

The Best of Ira Katz

Back in April my colleagues and I were caught up in the travel mess caused by the Icelandic volcano and exacerbated by the European authorities. I could not stop myself from expounding on the practical and moral necessity for freedom for individuals and institutions to deal with risk in light of the blanket ban on all air travel. A typical response was simply “le principe de précaution.”

Le principe de précaution, or the precautionary principle, was spawned in the environmental movement and applied to the ozone hole scare and restated at the various environmental conferences over the years. In 2005 a Charter for the Environment was incorporated into the French constitution that contained a version of the principle.

As Wikipedia defines it, “the precautionary principle states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is not harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those who advocate taking the action (emphasis in the original).” The necessity to prove the negative makes the application of the principle available virtually without exception. Thus, the Principe de Précaution should more accurately be called the Le Principe de Propaganda. The noted political philosopher Rahm Emmanuel has perfectly described the principle’s operational characteristics as, “never let a good crisis go to waste.” So whenever there is a danger, or a danger can be manufactured, use it as an opportunity to grab more power and use the excuse that it is to protect the people. Of course it should be emphasized that the principle is virtually never applied so as to reduce the scope of government action that do so much to cause real dangers to the public.

Even if you have not known of the precautionary principle by name before, you might have recognized its corollary application in many ways. As bad as the left wing environmentalists (or typical French bureaucrat) are in using the precautionary principle for applications such as climate change, the right has been perhaps worse. I say this guardedly, but after all war is the health of the state, and it is on the precautionary principle that the military-industrial-intelligence complex has been built. What could fit the precautionary principle more than the Bush doctrine of preventive war?

History and current events are full of examples, from bank bailouts and drilling bans to the threat of bombing to prevent bombs in Iran. With the empire perhaps in its death throes we can expect more and more; but hopefully with more and more people recognizing the absurdity of the claims, this old slight of hand will lose its effectiveness for the ruling class.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

The Best of Ira Katz

When do you think Israel will bomb Iran? I want to buy some oil futures as a hedge against high gas prices. Your thoughts

What follows is my response to Bill.

Dear Bill,

As you well know my academic background you cannot expect a simple answer to any question. So first I must digress to consider economic theory and history. The vast majority of people who call themselves economists are actually educated and paid to serve the interests of particular elite groups; i.e., the state or those who control the state. This has happened to other kept professional classes, exemplified by the long history of court historians, and more recently by climatologists. The elite class that makes up the state has, through many modes, but most successfully in the modern era through monetary inflation, parasitically lived off of the general population. It has been the task of the economists to make the people believe that this robbery has been for their own good. Economics is thought to be more complicated and mathematical because the purpose of so-called economics is to obfuscate, not to explain truth.

There is one school of economics, the Austrian, that does search for truth, as exemplified by its great champion, Ludwig von Mises (Anna’s middle name Louisa is in honor of Ludwig). One of the fundamental premises developed by Mises (and others in the Austrian school) is that the business cycle, the boom followed by the bust, is generated by excess credit in its many forms. Put simply, the government creates credit (or money directly) to maintain power for itself or to enrich its cronies; think military industrial complex, Wall Street, medical industrial complex, big agriculture (e.g., the Texas mohair interest), etc. The new money creates bubbles in various parts of the economy that must eventually collapse because they are not based on the reality of scarce resources. This process of boom and bust based on the false information for the economy in general enriches the connected elite and impoverishes the people. At the end of the process the currency collapses (most recently Zimbabwe), taking much of the distribution of labor in the economy with it. Mises called this late stage the crack-up boom.

We, the US and to some extant the world, are in this late stage of a cycle that could be said to have begun with the creation of the Fed in 1913, the final break with the gold tether of reality by Nixon in 1971, or the Greenspan-Bernanke great moderation bubble of the last 20 years or so. What comes next and when? The enormous theft and almost existential uncertainty (see Higgs on this critical point regarding the real economy) guarantee difficult times ahead. One Austrian school camp calls for a continuing depression that will result in mass deflation. Others see the Fed and other world central banks continuing their coordinated monetary inflation to overcome the deflation of the bust. I am very pessimistic regarding the economy. Whichever way the monetary systems goes, the real economy is, and I believe will remain, in a shambles; and because of the government response to the crises, will remain so for years to come, perhaps even decades. Japan has been in a recession for over 20 years. Argentina was a wealthy country at the beginning of the 20th century. The key concern is the status of the dollar (and closely related Treasury bond prices) in the coming months. I believe there will be another crisis, perhaps the bombing of Iran, but perhaps more likely another large failure of a financial institution that will initiate flight from the dollar. When the dollar loses reserve status the world will work in a different way.

Finally I will address your question more directly. I totally agree with your premise that the government wants to bomb Iran. First of all there are the sociopaths like Lieberman, who just like war and killing Muslims, no matter the American soldiers killed, the vast treasure wasted, and the various forms of blowback like terrorism. The majority simply see the political or economic profit for themselves no matter the consequences. Throw oil and Israel into the mix to amplify all of the forces pushing for war. Perhaps war profiteering is not the oldest profession but it has been around a long time. However, the world economic system based on only the fiat dollar is the foundation of the hyper-power status of the US. If, I think when, that changes the empire in general, and adventures like Iran specifically, will become untenable. I hope all of this will play out nonviolently similar to the end of the Soviet Union. But just as well, there may be a desperate attempt to keep the people distracted with more war (i.e., wag the dog). Will the bombs drop before the dollar bombs? I am terrible at market timing in general, let alone a geopolitical-economic question like this. But long term, I certainly believe a commodity like oil is a good direction for investment. However, for me it is more important to protect yourself from the dollar decline and to protect capital. The best protection for me is through gold, though I have also put money into general commodity funds. Timing and particulars of investing in oil are too complicated for me. Perhaps with the many bar patrons in the oil business you might get the best information.

To conclude, Bill you have run a successful bar for about 30 years, thus you understand people and utilizing scarce resources; these are the essence of economics. The best place to learn more about the basics and applications to the current situation is LewRockwell.com. Lew Rockwell is the chairman of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, located in Alabama, critically far from Washington. Bill Bonner at the DailyReckoning.com website and Justin Raimondo at Antiwar.com are both entertaining writers and likely to give you better information on the timing of the coming events than anyone else.

Cheers,
Ira

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

The Best of Ira Katz

With his wonderful ability to laugh in the face of disaster, Bill Bonner reports on the essentials of the situation.

06/26/09 London, England This just in…Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner have rushed to Los Angeles. If they can revive an entire world economy…why not the "King of Pop?"

Fans are hopeful…but we take a discouraging view of these revival efforts. We admire the achievements of science and technology; as for the works of economists and central bankers, well…we’ll wait to see how things turn out.

Yesterday, we took up the biggest illusion of the Bubble Era. We held it up to the light…and noticed:

So deeply rooted is this illusion that it will take more than a strong wind to uproot it.

We’re talking about the idea that government bureaucrats can do a better job of allocating capital than free markets. Everyone seems to believe it. They’re allowing a handful of economists — who failed the critical test; not one of them noticed the market tsunami coming last autumn — to direct the flow of trillions worth of savings. They’ve already put at risk more than $12 trillion. Right now, they’re denying the need for more "stimulus," but that is likely to change.

Recently Lew Rockwell gave a speech on economic understanding. He eloquently described how people with the knowledge of Austrian economics have a clear view of the economic scene in spite of the turbulence of fast-changing events. Of course he is right. Lew is the 1 in a 1000 true economist, even more so because I imagine he does not even call himself an economist.

But there are occasions when Lew’s insight is not comforting. As a regular reader and occasional writer for LRC, and a longtime follower of the Austrian school, I have been trying to prepare my own finances to withstand the expected crisis for several years. I was out of the market before the crash. I bought Krugerrands from Camino Coin at $400. But it is difficult to completely prepare. I bought a little 100-year-old duplex in 2005 for $120,000 with full knowledge we were near the peak of the bubble. But I needed a house, so my thinking was that at that price even under the worst circumstances I would never lose my shirt. Another problem is that my retirement savings are locked in dollars (primarily the TIAA annuity) for at least 8 more years.

As it happened, I was recruited for a job in France just after I purchased my house. So I only lived there for a few months and the two units have been rented on and off for three years. Thus, I now also have substantial savings in euros. But the euro is just another fiat currency, so I have scoured the gold shops near the Paris bourse searching for more Krugerrands with no luck. I recently returned to the US for the first time since the economic collapse to visit my family and friends and to take care of personal business (the IRS still requires a return and it gets quite complicated with the dreaded alternative minimum tax). My trip was sobering in that my family and friends are not properly prepared for the hard times that I believe are in store for the US.

So the analogy that comes to my mind regarding a follower of the Austrian school in the bubble era is like the witness to a coming of a train wreck. I know the train is heading for the washed out bridge at excessive speed. In fact I have just jumped off. But my luggage is still aboard, I have a few scrapes and bruises, and I don’t know how I will return to civilization. Even worse, my friends and family are still on the train.

At this point it seems hard to believe that newly struggling masses will ever understand the causes for their distress. While Austrian economics is readily understandable compared to the confused, ridiculous theories of the Keynesians, socialists and Greens of all stripes, I think what is most likely to stick in the heads of people is good writing that is explanatory about everyday experience. I have recently read a couple of examples of what I have in mind.

Here is George Eliot from her novel The Mill on the Floss (1860) on the subject of debt. "Mrs Tulliver carried the proud integrity of the Dodsons in her blood, and had been brought up to think that to wrong people of their money, which was another phrase for debt, was a sort of moral pillory; it would have been wickedness, to her mind, to have run counter to her husband’s desire to u2018do the right thing’, and retrieve his name." In this case the "right thing" is to pay off creditors. The passage continues with some sarcasm directed at the over-consumers of her day.

These narrow notions about debt, held by the old-fashioned Tullivers, may perhaps excite a smile on the faces of many readers in these days of wide commercial views and wide philosophy, according to which everything rights itself without any trouble of ours: the fact that my tradesman is out of pocket by me, is to be looked at through the serene certainty that somebody else’s tradesman is in pocket by somebody else; and since there must be bad debts in the world, why, it is mere egoism not to like that we in particular should make them instead of our fellow-citizens. I am telling the history of a very simple people, who had never had any illuminating doubts as to personal integrity and honor.

Another genre that can be very informative about economics is travel writing. Here is a passage from V. S. Naipaul‘s, India: A Wounded Civilization August 1975—October 1976. The true nature of how investment and knowledge lead to improved productivity, and then to more wealth is apparent in this poignant description of work in Old India.

The plateau around Poona is now in parts like a new country, a new continent. It provides uncluttered space, and space is what the factory-builders and the machine-makers say they need; they say they are building for the twenty-first century. Their confidence, in the general doubt, is staggering. But it is so in India: the doers are always enthusiastic. And industrial India is a world away from the India of bureaucrats and journalists and theoreticians. The men who make and use machines — and the Indian industrial revolution is increasingly Indian: more and more of the machines are made in India — glory in their new skills. Industry in India is not what industry is said to be in other parts of the world. It has its horrors; but, in spite of Gandhi, it does not — in the context of India — dehumanize. An industrial job in India is more than just a job. Men handling new machines, exercising technical skills that to them are new, can also discover themselves as men, as individuals.

They are the lucky few. Not many can be rescued from the nullity of the labour of pre-industrial India, where there are so many hands and so few tools, where a single task can be split into minute portions and labour can turn to absurdity. The street-sweeper in Jaipur City uses his fingers alone to lift dust from the street into his cart (the dust blowing away in the process, returning to the street). The woman brushing the causeway of the great dam in Rajasthan before the top layer of concrete is put on uses a tiny strip of rag held between her thumb and middle finger. Veiled, squatting, almost motionless, but present, earning her half-rupee, her five cents, she does with her finger dabs in a day what a child can do with a single push of a long-handled broom. She is not expected to do more; she is hardly a person. Old India requires few tools, few skills, and many hands.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

The Best of Ira Katz

DIGG THIS

Perhaps now, more than at any other time since the War of Secession of the 1860s, is the US immersed in such an existential crisis. During that earlier crisis President Abraham Lincoln delivered the most famous speech in US history, the Gettysburg Address. President Bush should deliver his own address at the site of the current crisis, Wall Street. Here I propose an address with reference to Lincoln’s; however, I believe his text concealed and obfuscated while this text states clearly the truth.

Four score and seven years ago our fore fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Four score and fifteen years ago our fore fathers, Morgan and Rockefeller, brought forth on this continent a new bank, the Federal Reserve, conceived in secrecy and dedicated to the proposition that all men’s wealth is the banks’ wealth.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

Now we are engaged in a great financial crisis, testing whether this bank, or any bank, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great market in that crisis. We have come to dedicate a portion of that market, as a final resting place for those corporations here that gave their wealth that the bank might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this market. The leveraged corporations, solvent and bankrupt, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the solvent, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who splurged here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored bankrupt we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of money — that we here highly resolve that these bankrupt shall not have gone bankrupt in vain — that this bank, under nobody, shall have a new birth of inflation — and that this Federal Reserve of the banks, by the banks, for the banks, shall not perish from the earth.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

Ira Katz Archives

DIGG THIS

In this time of human drama called the financial crisis, the coming tragedy is sad to contemplate. But in even the worst situations there are also elements of comedy, even fun. Let me explain. We know all the bastards are evil and greedy, but how evil are they: geniuses or idiots? Now that they have milked the cow (the productive economy and tax payers) dry are they consciously carving it into steaks or trying to fill it back full of milk? Do they understand that all of the bailouts and bullsh** are meaningless or make the situation much worse; is this all part of a grand plan to bring continuing power under a new more fascist system? In other words, are we witnessing a sin of commission by evil geniuses or a sin of stupidity by a group of idiots? To most of us in our daily lives the answer makes little difference, but there is a great difference in the level of sin involved. For me there is an element of fun contemplating which circle of hell, la Dante, the politicians, the sycophantic press, and the plutocrats who rule us will end up. Of course this is somewhat of an arcane pastime; a bit like doing statistical research on batting averages (disclosure, I am a former member of SABR). Also for a fleeting moment I wonder if it is wrong for me to think so blithely of such a serious aspect of the human condition. However, as I am part of the cow, I think it is a small sin and some well-earned enjoyment in my little escape into schadenfruede.

For anyone who has not studied Dante’s Divine Comedy I give a very simplified list of the concentric structure, the rings of Hell, that he describes by listing each circle’s sin. The center, the 9th circle, is for the worst of the worst, e.g., Judas Iscariot.

1. limbo
2. lust
3. gluttony
4. avarice
5. wrath
6. heresy
7. violence
8. conscious fraud and treachery,
9. treason

Let us consider some of the major actors in our farce (a hint regarding my feelings).

President George W. Bush. Regarding the economy, of course he is an idiot, a useful tool of the evil geniuses. But then again, he has enjoyed inflicting mass murder and destruction on other countries as well as the snuffing out of the last flickering light of constitutional government in the US. Certainly circle 7, 8, or 9 for him.

The pundit William Kristol. He is not a genius but he plays one on TV. He has much malevolent influence in high places. He can be given a share of the blame for virtually all of the bad things that the Bush administration has done. Perhaps he deserves to be somewhere in circle 8.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. The bald head and beard add to the appearance of gravitas, but as a highly successful academic economist, he must be an idiot. His helicopter speech alone puts him in my Pantheon of Idiots. Whenever he opens up his mouth there is fraud. Go to circle 8 and do not pass GO.

Big time investor Bill Gross, of PIMCO. I saw this guy shamelessly calling for the bailout knowing a good fraction of the ill-gotten gains would be going directly to him to cover his stupid bets. Seems like conscious fraud to me; circle 8.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. Here is someone that we know understands the damage he has done because he wrote about it decades ago. He is the archetypical Faustian character who has traded his soul for the power, the girl, and the money. He is certainly the evil genius who is a traitor to all of the human species. Yet, for years now he has personified another, the cartoon character Mr. Magoo. He is the lovable old guy who is blind literally and figuratively to all the damage he does. I can’t hate Magoo; in fact I always felt like saying to the latest Greenspan blunder, "Magoo you’ve done it again!”

OK, I admit I am not very inventive with my placements in Hell. In fact, Dante was an insightful old bird. He made a special place in hell, a pit called Blogia 10 in the 8th circle near the center. Dorothy L. Sayers, who made a translation of The Divine Comedy, remarked that Malebolge (the 8th circle of Hell) “began with the sale of the sexual relationship, and went on to the sale of Church and State; now, the very money is itself corrupted, every affirmation has become perjury, and every identity a lie; no medium of exchange remains.” I am in total accord with Dante, the whole kit and kaboodle are idiots who belong in circle 8, bolgia 10.

So there you have it, enjoy yourself, put your favorite politician or pundit in their circle of hell. You can play the same game for the Global War on Terror and any other government program too.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

Ira Katz Archives

DIGG THIS

LRC regularly includes many articles related to antiwar culture (for example, these on films and songs). With no forethought, I have recently come across three examples of antiwar literature, fiction and nonfiction. I bought Kangaroo (1923), by D. H. Lawrence (1882—1930), at a church book sale for 25p in Salisbury, UK. I had never heard of the book and am not a particular fan of Lawrence, but living in France it is nice to pick up some cheap books in English (I also bought a small volume of Simon Templar, "The Saint" stories by Leslie Charteris). The other two, the novel Beware of Pity (1939) by Stefan Zweig (1881—1942) and An Interrupted Life, the Diaries 1941—1943 by Etty Hillesum (1914—1943), were recommended by my wife. We had no discussions about the antiwar aspects of either book before or after my reading them. The three Europeans, writing after the First and into the Second World War, in very different ways reflect on a common theme, that a fundamental aspect to being antiwar is maintaining your own individuality while recognizing the individuality of others. I hope you find the passages presented here interesting.

As you might expect, Kangaroo is set in Australia. The story follows the experiences of an English writer named Richard Lovat Somers, newly arrived in Sydney, who becomes involved with a fascist-like conspiracy. The leader of the plotters is nicknamed Kangaroo. In fact, Lawrence was forced to leave England with his German wife, spending a couple of years in Australia. The following passage is from an autobiographical chapter called "The Nightmare" on his wartime experiences living in rural Cornwall.

He had known such different deep fears. In Sicily, a sudden fear, in the night of some single murderer, some single thing hovering as it were out of the violent past, with the intent of murder. Out of the old Greek past, that had been so vivid, sometimes an unappeased spirit of murderous-hate against the usurping moderns. A sudden presence of murder in the air, because of something which the modern psyche had excluded, some old and vital thing which Christianity has cut out. An old spirit, waiting for vengeance. But in England, during the later years of the war, a true and deadly fear of the criminal LIVING spirit which arose in all the stay-at-home bullies who governed the country during those years. From 1916 to 1919 a wave of criminal lust rose and possessed England, there was a reign of terror, under a set of indecent bullies like Bottomley of John Bull and other bottom-dog members of the House of Commons. Then Somers had known what it was to live in a perpetual state of semi-fear: the fear of the criminal public and the criminal government. The torture was steadily applied, during those years after Asquith fell, to break the independent soul in any man who would not hunt with the criminal mob. A man must identify himself with the criminal mob, sink his sense of truth, of justice, and of human honour, and bay like some horrible unclean hound, bay with a loud sound, from slavering, unclean jaws.

This Richard Lovat Somers had steadily refused to do. The deepest part of a man is his sense of essential truth, essential honour, essential justice. This deepest self makes him abide by his own feelings, come what may. It is not sentimentalism. It is just the male human creature, the thought-adventurer, driven to earth. Will he give in or won’t he?

Many men, carried on a wave of patriotism and true belief in democracy, entered the war. Many men were driven in out of belief that it was necessary to save their property. Vast numbers of men were just bullied into the army. A few remained. Of these, many became conscientious objectors.

Somers tiresomely belonged to no group. He would not enter the army, because his profoundest instinct was against it. Yet he had no conscientious objection to war. It was the whole spirit of the war, the vast mob-spirit, which he could never acquiesce in. The terrible, terrible war, made so fearful because in every country practically every man lost his head, and lost his own centrality, his own manly isolation in his own integrity, which alone keeps life real. Practically every man being caught away from himself, as in some horrible flood, and swept away with the ghastly masses of other men, utterly unable to speak, or feel for himself, or to stand on his own feet, delivered over and swirling in the current, suffocated for the time being. Some of them to die for ever. Most to come back home victorious in circumstance, but with their inner pride gone: inwardly lost. To come back home, many of them, to wives who had egged them on to this downfall in themselves: black bitterness. Others to return to a bewildered wife who had in vain tried to keep her man true to himself, tried and tried, only to see him at last swept away. And oh, when he was swept away, how she loved him. But when he came back, when he crawled out like a dog out of a dirty stream, a stream that had suddenly gone slack and turbid: when he came back covered with outward glory and inward shame, then there was the price to pay.

And there IS this bitter and sordid after-war price to pay because men lost their heads, and worse, lost their inward, individual integrity. And when a man loses his inward, isolated, manly integrity, it is a bad day for that man’s true wife. A true man should not lose his head. The greater the crisis, the more intense should be his isolated reckoning with his own soul. And THEN let him act, of his own whole self. Not fling himself away: or much worse, let himself be DRAGGED away, bit by bit.

Awful years — ’16, ’17, ’18, ’19 — the years when the damage was done. The years when the world lost its real manhood. Not for lack of courage to face death. Plenty of superb courage to face death. But no courage in any man to face his own isolated soul, and abide by its decision. Easier to sacrifice oneself. So much easier!

Stefan Zweig was an Austrian contemporary of Mises. His only novel, Beware of Pity, is the psychological story of a simple young officer who, unaware of her handicap, asks a lame girl to dance. From this incident, and the pity he feels, Zweig describes in excruciating detail the descent to a tragedy. In the prologue to the story a character like Zweig meets a famous former soldier who received the highest honor for bravery directly from the Austro-Hungarian Emperor. This soldier, the formerly simple young officer, is compelled to describe his life prior to the war to the Zweig character. The following passage depicts the conversation at a party where they first get to know one another.

Our Host, a lawyer by profession and dogmatic by nature, opened the discussion. Employing the usual arguments, he put forward the usual airy nonsense: the present generation, he said, knew all about war and would not let itself be tricked so innocently into the next war as it had been into the last. At the very moment of mobilization the guns would be pointed in the wrong direction, for ex-soldiers like himself in particular had not forgotten what was in store for them. I was annoyed by the smug assurance with which, at a moment when in thousands and hundreds of thousands of factories explosives and poison gas were being manufactured, he dismissed the possibility of a war as lightly as he might flip the ash off his cigarette with the tap of his forefinger. One should not always let the wish be father to the thought, I protested with some firmness.

The ministries and the military authorities who ran the whole war machine had likewise not been sleeping, and while we had been befuddling ourselves with Utopias, they had taken full advantage of the interval of peace in order to organize the masses in advance and have them ready to hand, at half-cock, so to speak. Even now, while Europe was at peace, the general attitude of servility had, thanks to modern methods of propaganda, increased to unbelievable proportions, and one ought boldly to face the fact that from the very moment when the news of mobilization came hurtling through the loud-speakers no opposition could be looked for from any quarter. The grain of dust that was man no longer counted today as a creature of volition.

Of course they were all against me, for, as is borne out be experience, the instinct of self-deception in human beings makes them try to banish from their minds dangers of which at bottom they are perfectly aware by declaring them non-existent, and a warning such as mine against cheap optimism was bound to prove particularly unwelcome at a moment when a sumptuously laid supper was waiting for us in the next room.

And now, to my surprise, the gallant hero of the day before entered the lists in my support — the very man in whom my false intuition had led me to suspect an opponent. Yes, it was sheer nonsense, he declared vehemently, to try nowadays to take into account the willingness or unwillingness of human material, for in the next war all the actual fighting would be done by machines, and men would be reduced to no more than a kind of component part of the machine. Even in the last war he had not met many men at the front had either unequivocally acquiesced in or opposed the war. Most of them had been whirled into it like a cloud of dust and had simply found themselves caught up in the vast vortex, each one of them tossed about willy-nilly like a pea in a great sack. On the whole, more men perhaps escaped into the war than from it.

I listened in astonishment, my interest particularly aroused by the vehemence with which he now went on: "Don’t let us deceive ourselves. If in any country whatever a recruiting campaign were to be launched today to some utterly preposterous war, a war in Polynesia or in some corner of Africa, thousands and hundreds of thousands would rush to the colours without really knowing why, perhaps merely out of a desire to run away from themselves or from disagreeable circumstances. But as for any effective opposition to war — I wouldn’t care to put it above zero. It always demands a far greater degree of courage for an individual to oppose an organized movement than to let himself be carried along with the stream — individual courage, that is a variety of courage that is dying out in these times of progressive organization and mechanization. During the war practically the only courage I came across was mass courage, the courage that comes of being one of a herd, and anyone who examines this phenomenon more closely will find it to be compounded of some very strange elements: a great deal of vanity, a great deal of recklessness and even boredom, but above all a great deal of fear — yes, fear of staying behind, fear of being sneered at, fear of independent action and fear, above all, of taking a stand against mass enthusiasm of one’s fellows. It was not until later on in civil life that I personally realized that most of those reputed to be the bravest at the front were very questionable heroes — oh, please don’t misunderstand me!" he said turning politely to our host, who was pulling a wry face. "I do not by any means except myself."

Etty Hillesum was a young Dutch Jew, living in Amsterdam during the war. She is a thoroughly modern woman. She enjoys sex and thinks about it often. She becomes deeply involved as a patient, assistant, and lover, with the psychoanalyst Julius Spier, who had studied with Carl Jung in Switzerland. The Diaries are painful to read as the Nazi noose is tightening around Etty and her family and friends; not least because we know in the end they will all be murdered. But they are also inspirational to read because her spiritual growth is what I would call saintly.

15 March, 9:30 A.M. [ . . . ] Yesterday afternoon we read over the notes he had given me. And when we came to the words, "If there were only one human being worthy of the name of u2018man,’ then we should be justified in believing in men and in humanity," I threw my arms round him on a sudden impulse. It is the problem of our age: hatred of Germans poisons everyone’s mind. "Let the bastards drown, the lot of them" — such sentiments have become part and parcel of our daily speech and sometimes makes one feel that life these days has grown impossible. Until suddenly, a few weeks ago, I had a liberating thought that surfaced in me like a hesitant, tender young blade of grass thrusting its way through a wilderness of weeds: if there were only one decent German it is wrong to pour hatred over an entire people.

That doesn’t mean you have to be halfhearted; on the contrary, you must make a stand, wax indignant at times, try to get to the bottom of things. But indiscriminate hatred is the worst thing there is. It is a sickness of the soul. Hatred does not lie in my nature. If things were to come to such a pass that I began to hate people, then I would know that my soul was sick and should have to look for a cure as quickly as possible. I used to believe that my inner conflicts were due to a particular cause, but that was much too superficial explanation. I thought that they simply reflected a clash between my primitive instinct as a Jew threatened with destruction and my acquired, rationalist and socialist belief that no nation is an undifferentiated mob.

19 February 1942. Thursday, 2:00 P.M. If I had to tell what made the greatest impression on me today I would say: Jan Bool’s great big purple chilblained hands. Somebody else was martyred today. That gentle boy from "Cultura." I still remember how he used to play the mandolin. He had a nice girlfriend at the time. She had since become his wife, and there was also a child. "He was one of the best," said Jan Bool, in the crowded university corridor. They have finished him off. And Jan Romein and Tielrooy and several more of the fragile old profs. They are now prisoners in a drafty barracks, in the same Veluwe where they used to spend their summer holidays in friendly guest houses. They are not even allowed their own pajamas, or anything else of their own, Aleida Schot said in the cafeteria. The idea is to demoralize them completely and to make them feel inferior. Morally they are all strong enough, but most of them are rather frail. Pos has retired to a monastery in Haren and is writing a book. Or so they say. It was very gloomy at this morning’s lectures. And yet it wasn’t altogether depressing. There was one bright spot. A short unexpected conversation with Jan Bool as we walked through the cold, narrow Langbrugsteeg and then waited at the tram stop. "What is it in human beings that makes them want to destroy others?" Jan asked bitterly. I said, "Human beings, you say, but remember that you are one yourself." And strangely enough he seemed to acquiesce, grumpy, gruff old Jan. "The rottenness of others is in us, too," I continued to preach at him. "I see no other solution, I really see no other solution than to turn inward and to root our all the rottenness there. I no longer believe that we can change anything in the world until we have first changed ourselves. And that seems to me the only lesson to be learned from this war. That we must look into ourselves and nowhere else." And Jan, who so unexpectedly agreed with everything I said, was approachable and interested and no longer proffered any of his hard-boiled social theories. Instead he said, "Yes, it’s too easy to turn your hatred loose on the outside, to live for nothing but the moment of revenge. We must try to do without that." We stood there in the cold waiting for the tram. Jan with his great purple chilblained hands and his toothache. Our professors are in prison, another of Jan’s friends has been killed, and there are so many other sorrows, but all we said to each other was, "It is too easy to feel vindictive." That really was the bright spot of the day.

And now to have a nap and then to learn a little about Rilke‘s girlfriend. Life goes on, and why not! I should write more regularly. But there is much too little time.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

Ira Katz Archives

DIGG THIS

George W. Bush should be the poster boy for Hayek’s dictum of Why the Worst Get On Top; in other words, he is the worst. His statements are the worst; virtually everything that comes out of his mouth is either stupid, illiterate, ill informed, false and/or a lie (e.g.; "Major combat operations have ended," "I’m the decider."). His administration is the worst, responsible for putting the US in its worst condition in terms of the economy, military readiness, international standing, education, and medical care. From the 2000 election to the present, Bush and his administration have consistently and successfully worked to undermine the remains of the constitutional republic that was the United States.

Yet, we must remember that though Bush has accelerated what was a descent into a freefall, the descent itself didn’t start with him and will thus not likely end with him. I was reminded of this fact recently while following an internet thread. It started at the blog at Takimag, where there is an interesting remembrance of William Buckley, especially regarding his personality. Among the civil discourse in the responses was a discussion of the conservative culture journal Modern Age. The archive of the journal contains all of the back issues starting from volume 1, number 1 issued in the summer of 1957. In that first issue is an article by Felix Morley. He was a Pulitzer Prize winning editor (Washington Post), a college president (Haverford College), and co-founder of the magazine Human Events. This apparently very establishment rsum should not obscure the fact that Morley was a stalwart of the Old Right ("See Joseph R. Stromberg’s Felix Morley: An Old Fashioned Republican Critic of Statism and Interventionism (Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp 269—77) and Felix Morley: An Old Fashioned Republican. Leonard Liggio, in Felix Morley and the Commonwealthman Tradition: The Country-Party, Centralization and the American Empire (Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 279—86) looks at Morley’s historical analysis of the libertarian movement and the rise of the state. Of Morley’s books, Freedom and Federalism (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1981 [1959]) and The Power in the People (Nash Publishing, 1972 [1949]) are his best critiques of imperialism abroad and the welfare state at home.")

The article from 1957 is called American Republic or American Empire. I happened to use a green highlighter to mark significant passages, including the title, on my printout of the article. As a whole, the article was so significant that it became as green as Dublin on St. Patrick’s Day. I will present several of these passages below with a few comments (though they are generally self-evident) but I highly recommend that you read the article yourself.

The article is preceded by a note from the editors (among them was Russell Kirk) that the goal of publishing this particular piece was to "stimulate thought, rather than to express a single point of view." Morley’s opening passage questioned the raison d’être of the American Right during the height of the Cold War, the targeted audience of the new magazine.

We seem to have reached the stage, in our national evolution, where we have a vested interest in preparation for war. It has become necessary for us to have a powerful enemy. Soviet Russia is currently our target not only because its economic system is communistic and its political system tyrannical, but perhaps primarily because the Russian organism rivals ours in actual or latent physical power. Russia could revert to free enterprise, or restore an hereditary Czardom, tomorrow; and still our Secretary of State would be compelled to question her bona fides. Peaceful co-existence with Russia is impossible not simply because of Communist plotting but because our economy apparently needs the constant stimulus of a threat of large-scale war.

Today, as NATO pushes east and the bellicosity toward Russia continues years after the fall of the Soviet Union helps prove the truth of Morley’s hypothetical point. He then presents a discussion of the economics of the military industrial complex, how it drives foreign policy, and the symbiosis between them. Simply stated by Morley, "As long as the country is menaced, or thinks itself menaced, Congress will patriotically vote almost unlimited funds for armament," as the menace lies throughout the world. In Morley’s time this was the Soviet menace, today it is terrorism (and perhaps once again the Russians and Chinese in the future). Furthermore, "Congress, which nominally controls the purse strings, seldom does much to cut the military estimates. They are presented as essential for the national security, and it is all but impossible for even the most conscientious legislator to prove that they are not essential." Robert Higgs has written extensively on how this practice operates today (e.g., see here and here).

Morley then explains why these economic issues are so serious to the state of our domestic political system.

Political scientists should give much more attention than is customary to the effect of these huge defense appropriations, continued in terms of tens of billions of dollars year after year. For while the immediate consequences may be primarily financial and economic, the ultimate consequences — which we are now beginning to witness — are political in the deepest sense of the word.

He then gives several examples of the propaganda that is necessary to the empire and the dangers that it leads to.

Today, with increasingly rare exceptions, you only read or hear — in matters of foreign policy — what Washington wants you to read or hear.

And what Washington wants one month may be, and often is, the exact opposite of what Washington wants the next month. That is why the American people are so bewildered trying to follow the contortions of a foreign policy which first disarms and then rearms the Germans; which first prohibits and then insists upon Japanese conscription; which gives tanks to the French in Algeria and then chides the French for using them; which encourages the Chinese Communists to take over the mainland but then says touch Formosa at your peril; which first arm Israel against the Arabs and then the Arabs against Israel; which denounces the Russians for refusing to disarm and then denounces them for offering to disarm. The net effort of these and many other contradictions is that, while we are undeniably feared, we are no longer either respected or admired abroad. And, which is more to the point, we are certainly both confused and uneasy here at home.

The fundamental difficulty that gives rise to this painful and dangerous confusion is, I think, clear. We are trying to make a federal republic do an imperial job, without honestly confronting the fact that our traditional institutions are specifically designed to prevent centralization of power. With this direct contradiction between the traditional form of our government and the current purposes of our government, a sort of political schizophrenia is inevitable. It is revealed in wavering, wobbling, and wasteful policies. The wealth of this country is so great, and its power so enormous, that we can stagger around for a long time, like a drunken giant, with relative immunity. At some time and at some point, however, this fundamental conflict between our institutions and our policies will have to be resolved.

Thus, it is clear that the transformation of republic to empire was occurring more than 50 years ago. Furthermore, with the Bush regime’s continuous onslaught of the Constitution in favor of the unitary executive and a series of horrible blunders at home and abroad that are leading to national collapse, perhaps the point in time that this u201Cfundamental conflict between our institutions and our policiesu201D that Morley suggested is now.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

Ira Katz Archives

DIGG THIS

When my wife Elisabeth and I learned that we were going to have our first child, choosing the right name became a frequent topic of conversation, not only between us, but with all of the friends and relatives. As a former academic I thought of this question in terms of first principles, what makes one name better than another, or why do people like certain names? Because of my engineering training, I also thought in terms of the design criteria and constraints regarding this question.

It seems the primary reason people pick names for their children these days is because it "sounds" good or it is popular. I think there is something to this idea of sounding good, but it is something very subjective. This is a problem because Elisabeth and I often do not agree on questions of taste. Or rather, she normally does not like what I think is perfectly fine (e.g., my clothes). As for popularity, I am against it. Most of the things I think are important and good are not popular (e.g., Austrian economics before Ron Paul).

In this age of decadence I believe maintaining discipline with children is especially important. For this reason I "insisted" (though this does not mean much in our family) a criterion be that the name be no more than two syllables. Therefore, one can yell the name of the child with sufficient volume and rhythm to make an impression without being trained as an opera singer.

My wife is French so the baby will have dual nationality. In France there is a long history of names coming and then going out of fashion that has much to do with the social class of the individual. Read this interesting article on French names. For example, "A Marcel came to mean the sleeveless under-shirt worn by truck-drivers and poor holiday-makers in the 1950s. René and Renée are also likely to return to grace after decades in oblivion. I have a friend — a lawyer in his 50s — who a few years ago changed his name from René to François because René gave the wrong signals to clients." Elisabeth had a notion about the name Simone. The response from all of her family and friends was unanimously negative, only a grandmother or and old, alcoholic, hooker could have the name Simone.

Thus a name that would not be out of place in either country or culture was necessary. To illustrate this problem, when I suggested Ernie, based on one of my boyhood idols Ernie Banks of the Chicago Cubs, Elisabeth could not control her laughter. I did not comprehend what was so funny about Ernie; however, I understood her point after she explained that the French word for a hernia is hernie, pronounced with a silent h. OK, so with Ernie being inappropriate I suggested Gale from Gale Sayers, another great athlete and gentleman. Can you believe it that a gale is the French word for a scab, especially like you might get from the plague. Who would have thought that the names of Chicago sports stars of the 60s were also embarrassing health problems in French?

Traditionally, and still used somewhat these days, is to name a child after someone in the family. This is a good idea when the family member lived an honorable life, not a pretense to attract inheritance money. A problem with this approach is to give offense to one set of relatives by honoring another.

For me the most important factor is to name the child after someone who would serve as a special example, illustrating the characteristics of a great individual. The name of someone for whom I can tell stories that will provide the inspiration for the noble and heroic life of my child. This approach to names is certainly in the tradition of naming in honor of the saints.

My first choice was Ludwig, for Ludwig von Mises. Of course this proposal again brought forth laughter and disbelief from Elisabeth. Obviously the name is neither French nor American. I countered with Louis, and proceeded to describe the life of the greatest economist that the readers of LRC know well. His scholarship, moral courage, and commitment to truth with personal generosity and kindness are ideals that I hope for my child more than any others. The lifetime motto of Mises, as taken from Virgil, “Tu ne cede malis,” or do not give in to evil (Virgil continues: “but proceed ever more boldly against it!”) is something I want my child to follow (buy the T-shirt).

For a girl I suggested Edith, for Edith Stein. Less well known to LRC readers, however, she had a similar background to Mises. She was born in 1891 (Mises1881) into a Jewish family in Breslau, a part of the German Empire that is now Poland (Mises into a Jewish family in Lemberg, part of the Austrian Empire that is now Ukraine). She was a brilliant philosopher who studied phenomenology under Edmund Husserl at the University of Göttingen, and later at the University of Freiburg, where she had followed him. Her searches for truth eventually lead her to the Catholic Church. In 1934 she entered the Discalced Carmelite convent at Cologne and took the name Teresa Benedicta of the Cross. But even there she was not safe in Hitler’s Germany so her order transferred her to Echt in the Netherlands in 1938. By July, 1942 the Germans were in control of that country. A public statement was read in all the Catholic (and some other denominations) churches of the country on July 20th, condemning Nazi anti-Semitic policies. In a retaliatory response on July 26th all Jewish converts, who had previously been spared, were ordered to be arrested. Stein and her sister Rosa, also a convert, were taken from the sanctuary of the convent and shipped to Auschwitz, where they died in the gas chambers on August 9th. She is now a Doctor of the Church, beatified, and canonized as Saint Teresa Benedicta of the Cross by Pope John Paul II in 1998. For me Edith Stein represents the epitome of faith, reason, scholarship, and courage.

On January 10th, 2008 Anna Louise Edith Katz was born healthy and happy in Paris. Her mother, also the picture of health and happiness, and the rest of the world calls the baby Anna; but her father secretly calls her Lulu.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

DIGG THIS

"Not Ron Paul again!" This is the sound of exasperation I often hear from my wife these days when I am reading the internet. I admit to being a Ron Paulaholic. Last night I heard the cry as I started the YouTube version of the "Morning Joe" program while she was trying to watch the documentary of a French celebrity required to make his way in Mongolia; sort of like a French version of reality TV.

I live in Paris. Being a Paulaholic here is not difficult because all of the best news and analysis about the campaign is on the internet. I can even participate in Ron Paul Meetups and events as shown in this video in Paris and a tea party in Strasbourg in front of the European Parliament. Go here to read the declaration.

I think all supporters understand the warm feeling of discussing with someone for the first time about their mutual regard for Ron Paul. But this is especially the case with people from other countries, who furthermore, are jealous of you as an American, because they cannot donate or vote for our man.

Even though my wife complains, she is very forgiving and occasionally interested in my obsession. After the Mongolian documentary ended we discussed the "Morning Joe" program I had been watching. The show was an example of the classic libertarian discussion. The libertarian (Dr. Paul) explains his position with details and further sources to read. In response he gets insulted (he was called a crackpot) with no attempt to address his arguments beyond propaganda-generated slogans. I empathize; for example, I don’t know how many times I have been accused of not caring about the poor because I am against the counter-productive welfare state.

My wife is French; therefore, she only knew that Lincoln was president during the War of Secession. That’s right; the US Civil War is more accurately named in France. As I started to explain the history in more detail she prudently went to the French version of Wikipedia to read about Lincoln where she found a link to this page on Jorge Luis Borges. Borges (1899—1986), originally from Argentina, was an internationally famous writer. The Borges Center at the University of Iowa says that "Although Borges could justifiably be considered the most erudite writer of this [20th] century, his works frequently provide the reader with moments of intact emotion or simple entertainment." And "through the perfection of his language, the extent of his knowledge, the universalism of his ideas, the originality of his fictions, and the beauty of his poetry — a real summa that does honour to the Spanish language and the universal mind." The Wikipedia article explains that when Juan Perón was reelected president of Argentina in 1973, Borges resigned from his post as director of the national library. And then following the death of his mother in 1975 became a world traveler for the rest of his life. This last sentence was footnoted with the following description of an interview for French radio that was later published.

Borges crée la surprise en déclarant qu’il considérait Abraham Lincoln comme le plus grand criminel de guerre du XIXe siècle . Selon lui, la guerre de Sécession n’était motivée que par le souci du pouvoir fédéral de récupérer les impôts des États sudistes, qui ne rentraient évidemment plus dans les caisses de Washington. Interrogé sur l’importance de la cause défendue, à savoir l’abolition de l’esclavage, il demanda si le fait de le faire abolir vingt ou trente ans plus tôt dans le Sud justifiait la mort de plus de 600 000 hommes et la mutilation de plusieurs dizaines de milliers d’autres.

My translation (with the help of my wife) appears below.

Borges created a surprise in declaring that he considered Abraham Lincoln "the greatest war criminal of the 19th century." According to him, the War of Secession was only motivated by the desire of the Federal power to recover the taxes of the southern states, which obviously no longer entered the cash registers of Washington. Asked about the importance of the cause defended, to abolish slavery, he asked if slavery were abolished 20 or 30 years earlier in the South justified the death of more than 600,000 men and the mutilation of several thousands of others.

Perhaps even Thomas DiLorenzo and Ron Paul were not aware of this statement by Borges, their fellow crackpot. They are not educated like Tim Russert and David Shuster who seemed to have studied at the Joseph Stalin School of Moral Calculus (proud graduates include Mao, Pol Pot and Madeline Albright), that teaches that a few hundred thousand dead are "worth it," whatever the political end.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

DIGG THIS

Of all the countries in the industrialized West, France has the reputation of being the least capitalistic. Hand-in-hand with this observation is the anti-American (really anti-Anglo) and anti-globalization mindset of the French elite that is shared by much of the population. In France only 36% agree and 50% disagree that "the free enterprise system and the free market economy is the best system on which to base the future of the world." This is a considerably more negative view than the rest of the world based on a 20-nation poll conducted by World Public Opinion.org.

As I write the French presidential election is in the homestretch of the second round. The center-right candidate Sarkozy waffles back and forth toward free market principles, but in general French politicians are cold to the market. The London Times reporter in Paris, Charles Bremner, noted on his blog that,

"All the main candidates are promising to reconcile France with the modern globalised economy and the business world, yet all of them are promising to defend the country against the forces of the market place. Laurence Parisot, head of Medef, the national employers’ organisation, noted today that u2018not one of the candidates has understood le libéralisme.’ France remains u2018divorced from money and the business world, especially in media commentary,’ she told Les Echos, the business daily."

In the French context read le libéralisme, or liberalism in English, as classical liberalism.

I am an American libertarian who has recently moved to France. The most common word of derision I hear is bourgeois. Yet when I respond to the speakers that they are bourgeois themselves, they readily agree. Certainly I feel philosophically distant from my French friends. But that is also true regarding the great majority of my American friends who have never heard of von Mises except from me.

What moves me to write this article are signs that I am a libertarian not totally in the wilderness. For example, the special edition (January-February 2007) of the French weekly Le Point titled "Smith, Tocqueville, Hayek … The Fundamental Texts of Liberalism." Prominent on the cover are images of the three luminaries. The volume is broken into three sections based on the 17th and 18th, the 19th, and the 20th centuries. In each section are essays on several writers (given below) and examples of their fundamental texts.

17th and 18th centuries

19th century

20th century

John Milton

Benjamin Constant

Ludwig von Mises

Thomas Hobbes

Jean-Baptiste Say

Friedrich von Hayek

John Locke

Alexis de Tocqueville

Piero Gobetti

Montesquieu

John Stuart Mill

Karl Popper

Franois Quesnay

Francois Guizot

Jacques Rueff

Anne Robert Jacques Turgot

Frédéric Bastiat

Raymond Aron

David Hume

`

John Rawls

Adam Smith

`

Robert Nozick

Edmund Burke

`
`

I cannot imagine a more serious and honest view of the fundamental ideas of classical liberalism written for a general audience this side of the Mises Institute. For example, the essay on von Mises contains the following three quotes (my translations):

"his economic knowledge was immense which allowed for particularly original contributions."

"He showed that public ownership of the means of production did not permit rational economic calculation."

"Mises explained that the different forms of interventionism (price controls, taxation, monetary inflation, etc.) result in the opposite of their intended effects."

The forward to the Le Point volume written by Catherine Golliau begins "In France generally u2018liberal’ is an insult when u2018communist’ is only old fashioned. Why?" One part of the explanation is a consequence of the collapse of the Maginot Line during WWII, the ensuing NAZI occupation, and the collaborationist Vichy government. All are considered conservative, bourgeois (capitalist) failures. In contrast, the resistance was dominated by communists. Thus after the war virtually all of society became à le gauche (to the left).

The English writer and former prison doctor Theodore Dalrymple has recently moved to France and presents a more nuanced view of French society. He writes, "I picked up — Liberation — had one of the most arresting headlines I have ever seen anywhere: Vive l’impot, Long live tax." The first thought that entered my mind might also be yours: typically French. But he continues,

"The peculiar thing is that the belief that tax is a kind of institutionalised kindness goes along with an attitude that makes a hero of anyone who succeeds in pulling the wool over the taxman’s eyes, and commiserates with anyone who gets caught cheating on his taxes. I doubt that the journalists at Liberation are any different from their compatriots in this respect. We in Anglo-saxonia are hypocrites about sex, but in France they are hypocrites about money."

In a similar vein, I have found the typical Frenchmen has great esteem for the state, but are more likely to ignore or skirt a silly bureaucratic command than a typical American. I find this attitude refreshing. I am not confident, but I am hopeful, that the French will follow their classical liberal instincts.

Ira Katz [send him mail] lives in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

DIGG THIS

Justice being taken away, then, what are kingdoms but great robberies? For what are robberies themselves, but little kingdoms? The band itself is made up of men; it is ruled by the authority of a prince, it is knit together by the pact of the confederacy; the booty is divided by the law agreed on. If, by the admittance of abandoned men, this evil increases to such a degree that it holds places, fixes abodes, takes possession of cities, and subdues peoples, it assumes the more plainly the name of a kingdom, because the reality is now manifestly conferred on it, not by the removal of covetousness, but by the addition of impunity. Indeed, that was an apt and true reply which was given to Alexander the Great by a pirate who had been seized. For when that king had asked the man what he meant by keeping hostile possession of the sea, he answered with bold pride, "What thou meanest by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, whilst thou who dost it with a great fleet art styled emperor."

The other day I came across this passage written by Saint Augustine of Hippo. It is so purely libertarian that it made me think Murray Rothbard was the reincarnation of St. Augustine. The passage is from The City of God, Chapter 4. — How Like Kingdoms Without Justice Are to Robberies (the quote is from Cicero). I read it in an essay in the conservative quarterly called The Salisbury Review (though this version is slightly different as taken from the linked website). Not for the first time my thought has turned to the relationship among Christianity, conservatism, and libertarianism. In a similar vein I read the following passage, found in an article written by Flavio Felice about a recent book by the Italian philosopher Dario Antiseri on relativism, and appearing in another conservative quarterly called The University Bookman, Summer 2006.

In a nutshell, this European history is the story of highs and lows involving a particular area of the world and the many ideas to which it has given birth, which have throughout its history sometimes embraced and fought one another. If we were to assert that our civilization is superior to others, says Antiseri, we could do so only in the sense that it has shown a capacity for self correction. At this point, however, if critical reason, pluralism, respect for diversity and tolerance are the features that characterise European identity, and which have enabled Europe to rise from the abyss of the lagers and gulags, we should ask ourselves what we Europeans would be without Christianity. Christianity represents an ideal which, throughout history — committing like others errors and horrors — has yet been able to exercise continuous pressure on the coercive forces of the establishment. Antiseri further notes how the statement of Jesus: "Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s," represents a decisive turning point which boosted the democratising process, acting as the corner stone of modern democracies. With this statement was introduced, almost uniquely among the great world civilizations, the principle that "Káisar is not Kyrios" — the definitive de-consecration of political power, its subjection to the inviolable realm of conscience and respect for the transcendental dignity of the human being. Therefore, asserting that "Káisar is not Kyrios" means above all keeping in check political power and its all devouring claims, and recognizing the political consequences of this religious principle. It is, for example, the basis of the principle of aid among and between citizens, which enables the carrying out of even secular projects.

For many libertarians Christianity, perhaps any organized religion, and libertarianism are irreconcilable. This is obviously true where the governors and the clergy are synonymous. But even at the height of the temporal power of the papacy in the medieval era the Church acted as a check, and thus a limit, on royal power. The episode at Canossa comes to mind, where Pope Gregory VII forced the German King Henry IV to consent to the right of Popes to judge kings. Of course, this episode is more complicated than described here, as is always true in the lives of real people. And certainly the Catholic Church, and other Christian churches, has been involved in some of the more brutal periods of history as alluded to in the previous passage. However, no matter what one believes about theology, I believe the historical rise of Christianity has had a fundamental connection with the rise of freedom in the West, and therefore, with libertarianism. This is because the libertarian ethos begins with the radical philosophy of Jesus, that all human beings; both family and strangers, friends and enemies, kings and slaves, prostitutes and queens, heroes and tax collectors can have equal worth to God; and therefore, have rights of protection to their person and property as granted by God, not by governments of men. Thus for me, there is a direct connection between conservative Christianity and libertarianism.

Ira Katz [send him mail] teaches mechanical engineering at Lafayette College. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

I have been Living in Paris for the last six months working for a French company. I am scheduled to go back to teaching in the United States in January. However, I am now thinking about staying in France indefinitely; that is, I am thinking of becoming an expat.

My decision rests on many factors regarding career, finances, and especially family responsibilities. But there is something more that is bothering me. I write on the eve of the 4th and with Louis Armstrong playing on the stereo. Having lived overseas before for several months and traveled often I am surprised to have a queasy feeling that I am becoming an ex-patriot, someone who has given up on he USA. Having just returned from a quick trip back to the USA I must admit to a foreboding of the future of the country.

If a pollster asked me now I would say the country is going in the wrong direction, fast. With the economic narcotics supplied by the pusher Greenspan, the country is in a Keynesian haze. I was advised to spend all the money in the small trust that my mother created to assist another member of the family. The logic being that the worst possible result is to have any funds left after death. The reality that the only way to gain wealth is through hard work and saving, as opposed to borrowing and spending, is difficult to find in the country.

The superficiality of our culture was brought home to me by the following anecdote. On a domestic flight I was given a pack of crackers flavored with "lightly smoked swiss," and the manufacturer felt the need to add "real cheese" on the package.

I have a growing affection for France and the French. Of course, in many ways they are farther along in the welfare state rot than the US. But France still has roots in a culture of the west that the intellectuals have not been able to exterminate. The French still care about the quality of their food. They still have Gothic cathedrals and hilltop villages that look like they did 1000 years ago. As far as France has gone adrift these anchors still exist to keep it moored from the shipwreck that seems to me is coming to the US.

I have consistently thought that Bush and his government’s response to 9/11 was wrong: the Patriot Act, the Department of Homeland Security, the transformation of airports into post offices, and foreign wars have all been wrong. The thought of H. L. Mencken is especially true now, "Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under."

The foreign policy of Woodrow Wilson that consisted of progressive era arrogance and utopianism, in my opinion the most disastrous in US history, is the unashamed policy of Bush. "Everything has changed since 9/11" is a propaganda slogan that Orwell would appreciate. Thus nation building, which was wrong during the 2000 campaign, is now good policy. Add the domestic policy of Lyndon Johnson and no opposition party and you have a country, an empire, headed toward debt and ruin.

What did an insightful Roman of the 5th century think about his country, or even an intelligent Russian in 1985? What does a simple citizen do in times like these?

If a person entered the room proclaiming how great he was, the correct response would be to shun such a pompous jerk. But that is just the way the USA behaves. What should we do? A change in attitude would be a good start. Joe Sobran has written,

G.K. Chesterton, with his usual gentle audacity, once criticized Rudyard Kipling for his "lack of patriotism." Since Kipling was renowned for glorifying the British Empire, this might have seemed one of Chesterton’s "paradoxes"; but it was no such thing, except in the sense that it denied what most readers thought was obvious and incontrovertible.

Chesterton, himself a "Little Englander" and opponent of empire, explained what was wrong with Kipling’s view: "He admires England, but he does not love her; for we admire things with reasons, but love them without reason. He admires England because she is strong, not because she is English." Which implies there would be nothing to love her for if she were weak.

Of course Chesterton was right. You love your country as you love your mother — simply because it is yours, not because of its superiority to others, particularly superiority of power.

This seems axiomatic to me now, but it startled me when I first read it. After all, I was an American, and American patriotism typically expresses itself in superlatives. America is the freest, the mightiest, the richest, in short the greatest country in the world, with the greatest form of government — the most democratic. Maybe the poor Finns or Peruvians love their countries too, but heaven knows why — they have so little to be proud of, so few "reasons." America is also the most envied country in the world. Don’t all people secretly wish they were Americans?

The founders had the right idea, no alliances, no war, but trade with all. A smaller, humbler government overseas would lead to a precipitous drop in the number of terrorists. A smaller, humbler government at home would make us a better country overall. We need to stop trying to be great and concentrate on being good.

As for me I know I will always be an American and love my country; but I will unfortunately always loathe my government. This is true even if I may be living somewhere else among people who have every reason to be proud of their own lands and probably every reason to loathe their own governments.

Ira Katz [send him mail] teaches mechanical engineering at Lafayette College. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

My arrival was without incident and now I am quite settled. Much of the credit goes to Cosmopolitan Services Unlimited (CSU). CSU primarily consists of a group of attractive young women that work to ease the transition to life in Paris. . . . Wait a minute, what are you thinking? These girls are totally professional. . . Duh! No, not that kind of professional! The company hired them to obtain my work permit and to help me find an apartment.

rue Daguerre

The apartment market in Paris is fierce. One must have a list of 10 places on the search day, and rank the choices as they go so fast. But I liked the very first one and was ready to take it right there. It is even the best value. But prudence reined and I viewed several more, which was an interesting way to see Paris. The best feature of the apartment is its location on rue Daguerre, in the 14th. (Paris is broken into 20 districts called arrondissements. Locals usually simply use the number of the arrondissement to describe a location.) My street has lots of everything and is very lively. In a word, it is very Parisian.

I am working at a research center outside of Versailles. I walk to the train station (Gare Montparnasse), take the 7:20 express (less than 15 minutes) to Versailles Chantier, and there catch a bus to the center. From door to door it is about 60 minutes. The commute has been my biggest (but minor) problem in France. I am used to a small town in the US where I walk to work, or I could drive and get there in 5 minutes.

Also the commute has been made more difficult by the weather. I expected it to be warmer and wetter than Easton, PA where I live in the US. But it has been cold, gray and dark. After waiting for the bus and standing around French train stations I was chilled all day. I added an extra layer of clothing that made a big difference. I am exaggerating, but it seemed like there was not a single nice day. But now it is spring and things are different, as I will explain below.

As was recently written about Germans, the French have also been soaking in a socialist brine for a long time. Thus the company seems very nurturing and yet somehow profitable. I try not to ask for anything but they are always giving me something. The company is paying for French lessons and giving me time during the day to go to class.

In France, for starting employees the usual number of vacation days is 25. There are 12 federal holidays. But two days are added as floating bridge days; and two more for some historic reason. Recently they passed a law limiting the work week to 35 hours. Actually it is difficult to work only 35 hours a week. The solution: salaried employees are required to take 3 days off every three months. So effectively there are 53 days off.

But there is no free lunch, and the French pay in several ways, especially in taxes. On my pay statement there are 23 different social taxes listed at various rates with various bases. They amount to about 17% of my brut (gross) salary and is deducted. The remaining net salary is the basis for the income tax. For some other reason another 3% is deducted. But I, and everyone else, receives u20AC42.20 for transportation. The income tax is not withheld, though you can have it arranged to do so. The highest rate is about 50%. Accountants for personal returns are rare as most people must simply pay what they are told to pay. I am not sure what my tax bill is going to be next March, but I am sure I will be writing the biggest check of my life to the French government.

It is hard to understand why the French economy has not collapsed. I think France has found the economic niche of making money doing things inefficiently. Anyone waiting for service in a brasserie knows first hand about inefficiency. But one still loves to be there and so tends not to mind. I think the Argentines could come up with a very good sparkling wine, but they could never charge $100 a bottle like the French do for Champagne, even if it were of the same quality.

I have written before about the importance of knowing a second language and my study of Spanish. It would have been nice to go to Spain to continue my studies, but c’est la vie. Now my goal while here is to learn as much French as I can. To support the concept of second language study I present the following quotes.

Charlemagne: To have another language is to possess a second soul.

Sir Humphrey Davy: Language is not only the vehicle of thought, it is a great and efficient instrument in thinking.

Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe: Those who know nothing of foreign languages, knows nothing of their own.

Ludwig Wittgenstein: If we spoke a different language, we would perceive a somewhat different world.

But my favorite and most apt is from Mark Twain after his visit to France.

Mark Twain: In Paris they simply stared when I spoke to them in French; I never did succeed in making those idiots understand their own language.

Speaking in French is like being a fish out of water. Not in the sense of the cliché of being out of place, but more literally. In fact, you must round your lips, like a fish, and you must choke (as the said fish is out of water so cannot breath) on the end of words so as not to pronounce the last letters.

An old friend of mine who runs a great bar in San Antonio called the Bombay Bicycle Club once told me, "You can tell if it’s a good joint by the bread." France has wonderful bread! The bread culture is representative of the wider culture of spending resources (money and time) on food. Almost everyone goes to the boulangerie (bakery) everyday for a baguette. Of course the bread is baked daily. And with no preservatives it is stale by morning. A mystery of French culture is what people do with the stale bread.

Greetings in France are important. You probably know about the kiss-kiss on each cheek. For women and women, women and men, and even men and men this is most common. A pleasure in France is to watch a group of young women parting, everyone kissing everyone twice; their bobbing heads reminds me of pretty chickens. But there is more about greetings in France; a semi-formal greeting to everyone, everyday is typical. Several workers in my building, even those who work in another department, are sure to shake the hand and exchange a bonjour with everyone else in the building every day, including me!

The French must have coffee to work. If coffee is not the fuel of French industry, it is certainly the lubricant. A strike in the Brazilian coffee fields would no doubt be more devastating to the French economy than a transportation strike (which are common enough anyway).

An important component to my quality of life is a local pub. I have found a nice little bistro near my apartment, but even closer to the hotel I stayed at upon my arrival. Les Tontons is a nondescript place, but the young bartender Guillaume takes good care of me and I always seem to have a conversation. What is bad about Les Tontons? Well, not everybody in France smokes, but virtually everybody smokes while drinking. The bars and bistros do not have air cleaners so the smoke can be quite thick.

One of the comments I often heard in America is that the French hate Americans. This joke I found on the internet is attributed to Conan O’Brien.

Q: Why don’t the French want to bomb Saddam Hussein?

A: He hates America, he loves mistresses and he wears a beret. He is French.

I have talked to many strangers (though I know them now) in Les Tontons. When they understand that I am from the US they all said they like Americans very much. Of course then the conversation often drifts toward politics and the war, where all dislike Bush. In fact, it seems every other night someone has bought me a drink. Though the night I was given several kirs (white wine with the liqueur cassis) may not have been in kindness as I had a major headache the next day.

Of course, it helps that I dislike Bush, and for more reasons than the French do. But I also respond that I don’t like Chirac either. What’s more, I think if France had the power of the US it would be doing as much or more mischief around the world as the US is now. In a footnote regarding the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior in a book I was reading, an English author writes "Anyone with any sense and with a knowledge of French history adopts an attitude of caution and mistrust in dealing with the rulers of France." And for readers of LRC, substitute any country for France.

To contradict another stereotype, I have found that the French also have a wonderful sense of humor and are usually happy. However, this stereotype is understandable if one only reads French literature.

Another common perception of France regards their war record. Two more jokes from the internet make the point.

Q: Why do the French call their fighter the “Mirage”?

A: Because it’s never seen in a combat zone.

Q: What do you call 100,000 Frenchmen with their hands up?

A: The Army.

This perception comes from WWII but is emphasized because the French would not join the US in Iraq, though they did fight in the first Gulf War.

Normally I teach at Lafayette College, named after a Frenchman. The following plaque can be found on a building close to my office.

Without the French navy the Americans would not have won the battle at Yorktown, and perhaps not even the war. As for courage and sacrifice, consider the single battle of Verdun during WWI. The number of casualties may actually be more than the official French war history that was published in 1916 of 377,231. Of this number 162,308 (out of a population of 42 million) were dead or missing. Compare this number with the total number of Union combat deaths in the American Civil War of 110,070 (out of a population of 34 million). Perhaps our country would be less willing to jump at the solution of war after living through such a catastrophe.

I am sure you have read about the student demonstrations in France. LRC writers have commented on them here, here, here, and here. In a word, the issue was tenure for new workers. I find that Americans do not even understand the tenure system for college and university professors. For a whole country to have tenure is incomprehensible. For Parisians to take to the streets for serious or silly reasons is as much cultural as political. Christopher Dawson wrote about the Paris at the time of the French Revolution.

For Paris was still at heart the old city of the League and it needed no teaching from America or England to learn the lesson of Revolution. It remembered the night of St. Bartholomew and the killing of Henry III, and its crowds rallied as readily to the preaching of the new Cordeliers and the new Jacobins as to that of their Catholic predecessors who led the mob against the Huguenots and held the city for five years against Henry of Navarre. Already in the days of July the people of Paris had asserted their power in unequivocal fashion and had regained their liberty by force of arms. Henceforward the people of Paris were an independent power, and a power which possessed far more political self-consciousness and revolutionary will than the people whose representatives sat in the National Assembly.

Other famous street revolts in Paris occurred in 1830, 1848, 1871, and 1968. The cars burning in the suburbs last November and the student demonstrations against the CPE (the proposed law in question) this year allow 2005 and 2006 to be added to this famous or infamous list, depending upon your point of view. One of the demonstrations began down the street from my apartment. A couple of hours before the scheduled start of the march the atmosphere was more that of a carnival than of a mob. In fact I had a nice sausage sold by one the many street vendors who came to serve the gathering crowd. In the end, I think the demonstrations were more about the ambitions of the connected power players, both the politicians and the leaders of the syndicates (like unions but more powerful and integrated into society than in the US) that organized them.

Sabine Barnhart has written eloquently about traveling.

Traveling is a personal challenge that many men still want to experience. It’s the last frontier to break away from the old familiar ways and discover something new. The renewal generally brought progress to man. He returned with new technology, medicine, music, poetry and goods. Sometimes he discovered these things in another land, or he found it at the edge of his own universe — in his mind. But what he conquered and discovered; he owned his experience. This personal and very private knowing is something that could not ever be stolen and taken from him. It’s an eternal gift that would carry him through his entire life and shape his character.

As this is true for traveling, it is even more so for living abroad. For me to soak up the French culture, both the wine and the socialist brine, has been wonderful and interesting. And now that spring has arrived all hearts are beating faster in Paris. The long sunny days and flowers make it is easy to forget the long dreary winter, politics, economics and work. The mind instead turns to love; perhaps this is dangerous, but it is obvious why the Parisians are now smiling as they dreamily look into each other’s eyes.

Ira Katz [send him mail] teaches mechanical engineering at Lafayette College. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

There is a simple solution to people problems. Kill the person. From the first stirrings of life to the lingering end this simple solution is becoming the preferred norm. Of course abortion is a simple solution to the problem of an unwanted child. Even if many do not recognize the fetus as a person, it cannot be argued that killing something is the partial solution to problems such as overpopulation and crime. I wonder if Earth First environmentalists have fantasies of a simple solution for reducing the parasitic population of humans. Much has been written about the sad case of Terry Schiavo. All I wish to state is the obvious, that there was a problem for Mr. Schiavo that has now been solved by the simple solution of her death. And regarding a simple solution to the civil unrest after Katrina I give you Governor Kathleen Blanco with my favorite quote of 2005, her description of the Louisiana National Guard.

They have M-16s, and they’re locked and loaded . . . These troops know how to shoot and kill, and they are more than willing to do so, and I expect they will.

In a former, perhaps more brutal age, Caesar could deal with his people problems in Gaul in a straightforward way.

By this battle the war with the Veneti and the whole of the sea coast was finished; for both all the youth, and all, too, of more advanced age, in whom there was any discretion or rank, had assembled in that battle; and they had collected in that one place whatever naval forces they had anywhere; and when these were lost, the survivors had no place to retreat to, nor means of defending their towns. They accordingly surrendered themselves and all their possessions to Caesar, on whom Caesar thought that punishment should be inflicted the more severely, in order that for the future the rights of ambassadors might be more carefully respected by barbarians; having, therefore, put to death all their senate, he sold the rest for slaves.

Today one might question who the barbarians were. And today the neoconservatives dream that President Bush could deal with the Iraqi insurgency in a similar fashion. But as I think about it, in many ways Bush’s Caesarian section of democracy in the Middle East is very much in the spirit of that esteemed statesman who did so much to turn his ancient republic into an empire.

It is argued that we have brutal adversaries so we must employ brutal means. Certainly there are Islamic fanatics that understand simple solutions such as the late, great Ayatollah Khomeini, who was quoted in The West and the Rest by Roger Scruton.

If one allows the infidels to continue playing their role of corrupters on Earth, their eventual moral punishment will be all the stronger. Thus, if we kill the infidels in order to put a stop to their [corrupting] activities, we have indeed done them a service. For their eventual punishment will be less. To allow the infidels to stay alive means to let them do more corrupting. [To kill them] is a surgical operation commanded by Allah the Creator. . . . Those who follow the Koran are aware that we have to apply the laws of qissas [retribution] and that we have to kill. . . . War is a blessing for the world and for every nation. It is Allah himself who commands men to wage war and kill.

The logic is compelling. Our response to fanaticism and terrorism, to the uncertainty of picking out the terrorists in airports, is the simple solution of training air marshals to have a shoot to kill mentality and a hair trigger. It should be understood but isn’t that the license to kill has not been granted to James Bond 007, but to the bureaucratic equivalent of your postman. Thus we have nervous passengers gunned down by our protectors. Furthermore, we send bombs and cruise missiles at our enemies, based on slam-dunk intelligence, no matter the innocence, gender, or age of the bystanders. And of course there are the continuous wars that cause so much death and destruction,

Many readers will certainly recognize the theme of this essay is what John Paul II called the culture of death. He has written in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae the following description of the moral and social case against state sponsored death.

This is what is happening also at the level of politics and government: the original and inalienable right to life is questioned or denied on the basis of a parliamentary vote or the will of one part of the people — even if it is the majority. This is the sinister result of a relativism which reigns unopposed: the “right” ceases to be such, because it is no longer firmly founded on the inviolable dignity of the person, but is made subject to the will of the stronger part. In this way democracy, contradicting its own principles, effectively moves towards a form of totalitarianism. The State is no longer the “common home” where all can live together on the basis of principles of fundamental equality, but is transformed into a tyrant State, which arrogates to itself the right to dispose of the life of the weakest and most defenseless members, from the unborn child to the elderly, in the name of a public interest which is really nothing but the interest of one part. The appearance of the strictest respect for legality is maintained, at least when the laws permitting abortion and euthanasia are the result of a ballot in accordance with what are generally seen as the rules of democracy. Really, what we have here is only the tragic caricature of legality; the democratic ideal, which is only truly such when it acknowledges and safeguards the dignity of every human person, is betrayed in its very foundations: “How is it still possible to speak of the dignity of every human person when the killing of the weakest and most innocent is permitted? In the name of what justice is the most unjust of discriminations practiced: some individuals are held to be deserving of defense and others are denied that dignity?” When this happens, the process leading to the breakdown of a genuinely human coexistence and the disintegration of the State itself has already begun.

To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others. This is the death of true freedom. . .

The point of this essay is to warn readers to be wary of the simple solution that kills the problem.

Ira Katz [send him mail] teaches mechanical engineering at Lafayette College. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

He begins by describing one of the usual methods for the European Union to help the poor relations, the public works project.

The Egnatia Motorway across the north of Greece is one of the u2018largest road construction projects in Europe’. Six hundred and eighty kilometers long and 24.5 meters wide, it requires the construction of 1,650 bridges, 74 tunnels, 50 interchanges, 43 river and 11 railway crossings. A modern Greek marvel in the making where at least half of the costs are financed by the European Union. In Greece today, a plethora of public works are completed or in progress thanks to the generous aid of the EU. Billions in funds have been transferred southward to the EU’s only Balkan state member since its entry in 1981. By the 1990s, that assistance averaged about 3.5 percent of GDP yearly. To put it in perspective, it would be as if the U.K. received around $62 billion from the EU in 2004. For almost a quarter of a century, Greece has been the beneficiary of a European willingness to become one cohesive whole [or at least the willingness of the bureaucrats in Brussels, my aside], but despite the bridges, ports, tunnels, roads and agricultural subsidies, Greece remains as far away from the European spirit as it did when it joined the Union.

There is always some optimism when a grand public project is announced. The Athens underground was supposed to solve the city’s traffic problems, the Olympic Games were supposed to revitalize tourism, and the Egnatia Motorway is supposed to make Greece the economic tiger of the region. There are pronouncements of great hopes when a project begins, more pronouncements when the project begins, more pronouncements during the construction and a couple more at the opening of numerous openings. Finally pessimism seems to overtake everything. These public projects are like miracles without miraculous ends. The great leap forward is always postponed for a later day.

Of course we could compare this typical history to countless others in the Third World like the Aswan Dam in Egypt. But even more telling is to compare this southern tale with that in the north of Europe as recently related by Karen Kwiatkowski, where in Ireland economic freedom has been such a powerful force for peace and prosperity.

The next passage on the pernicious effects of farm subsidies is evidence that all libertarians should be ready to recite in a political discussion.

European assistance has been to Greece what oil has been to the Middle East; the lifeline of poor government, mischievous habits and exasperated hopes [and in Africa and everywhere else where foreign aid has been prevalent!]. Kathimerini, an authoritative daily newspaper, reported what the cotton subsidies have done in agriculture: there was cotton production of good quality in Greece, cultivated efficiently in the most suitable fields at a good price — now farmers receive subsidies that are up to three times the market price of cotton. Cultivation of cotton has expanded in millions of unsuitable acres. Excess well drilling has drained the valleys of their underground water, and pollution from the senseless use of fertilizers has been linked to serious health problems in the adjacent residential areas. This year the cotton farmers are to receive 690 million euros in subsidies. Since this amount is based on an agreed-upon quantity to be produced, farmers will produce more and attempt to get the national government to make up the difference. The common practice is to block major motorways with tractors; then the negotiations start.

Here is a perfect example of government interference in markets for all you economics professors to use in Econ 101. "Can we all repeat after Master von Mises, u2018government causes malinvestment’."

The cultural effects of these policies are corrosive akin to putting carbon steel in an acid bath. Mr. Linardatos continues:

Farming is associated with independence and self-sufficiency but the subsidy farmer is a new breed. He is entirely dependent on the political process, which he thoroughly cultivates, and his connection to the land is shallow. If the farmers are not out fighting for their u2018rights,’ then someone else will be: The teachers who do not want to be evaluated, contract civil servants who want to become permanent, policemen who do not want to police, students who do not want to learn. The list is long, reflecting a Greece cut to pieces with each faction trying to impose absurd demands on the rest. The pre-eminent action of civic participation is to demand employment in the public sector, or to defend retirement at 50, to build houses illegally in the forest, or to exploit fully one’s state-sanctioned monopoly.

How did these terrible predicaments come to be? As is usually the case we might look to the class who have time to think these things up.

For the local intellectual class, this is the triumph of politics. For decades now, progressive ideas are the only ideas in Greece. They have been so thoroughly instilled in everyone, from the first grader up to the Prime Minister, that they permeate everything. Any movement in a different direction is anti-social, reactionary, liberal, or an Anglo-Saxon barbarity. Under the tutelage of progressive ideas there are privileges without duties, advantages without merit, crime without punishment and hard work with no reward. . . .

This is the relativism of everyday life. The most important thing is what you can get away with. It is the tragedy of the commons writ large; a public sphere where the private and the public meet under the most disadvantageous terms. Someone would expect that decades of policies intended to foster social cohesion would produce a society of benevolent people. Instead we have narrow-minded, cynical egoists gyrating in alternate states of self-satisfaction and self-hatred.

On that dissonant note we might all stop and think of the policies in our own countries that decade-by-decade, year-by-year, even day-by-day are acting in a similar way to affect the way we live.

Ira Katz [send him mail] teaches mechanical engineering at Lafayette College. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

I will begin to describe the nature of YPs by the converse description of what it means to be an adult. Acting as an adult requires one to: 1) understand and meet his/her responsibilities; 2) understand and respect the needs and rights of others; and 3) understand and appreciate quality. It is often beneficial to the understanding of any concept to look at its limits. In this case consider the opposite limit to acting as an adult, the nature of a small child; i.e., being childish. A child has no responsibilities. Furthermore, a child expects all to serve their desires to such an extent that they do not comprehend anyone else’s needs. As for quality, one need only observe the monomaniacal tendencies of children to understand they are driven by emotions that are far from thought in their appreciation of popular culture in every form, from the movies they see over and over again, to the hotdog they eat void of all condiments and bun. YPs mimic these same childish tendencies. For example, it is rare to find young people who can make it to an appointment on time. This is not being responsible and typically does not respect others. The quality of youth culture, which is one in the same with the popular culture, is deplorable. YPs have so much disposable income given to them that their tastes tend to dominate the markets for popular entertainment such as music, movies and television. Thus, in these mediums adults are depicted as dolts and YPs as wise. Some might call this a market failure. I call it a cultural failure. There are multitudes of examples of the childish behavior of YPs that will certainly come to mind to those who read this essay.

Becoming an adult is a process of changing perspective from inward to outward. In total, the requirements are synonymous with gaining wisdom. It is the proper role of parents to facilitate the process of their children moving from a childish nature to a mature, adult nature. Herein arises a fundamental problem with our culture. Certainly there has been somewhat of a generation gap throughout human history. But I believe something has changed in modern Western culture that is unique. The adults in society have abdicated their responsibility of raising their children to be adults. Thus, YPs act more like children than like adults. Furthermore, adults are mesmerized by a cult of youth such that they act childish themselves. Perhaps today’s adults have taken their 1960s slogan of not trusting anyone over 30 to heart. Now being over 30 they don’t trust themselves.

Much of the cult of youth comes from the infantile belief that the youthful life without cares (i.e., responsibilities) makes one happier. Apparently those who hold such a belief have forgotten all of their own youthful angst or have not experienced the deeper satisfaction that comes from a well-lived life in all its stages. I will admit that to be young is to be healthy and attractive. Perhaps even innocent and inquisitive, but these attributes have certainly left most teenagers and are not precluded to an adult. There is now a pervasive, childish sentimentality among adults that regards emotion over thought. In turn adults have instilled in children self-esteem as the trump to objective views of their talents and behavior. Thus there is a generation of young people who have strong opinions based on no knowledge and have a self-centered view of the world. This behavior is most obvious in considering any sports team on any level. It is typical for players to have their own agendas making them uncoachable and team play as rare as the dodo bird. When a team, even with mediocre talent, does follow instruction they become champions. I would put the New England Patriots and Detroit Pistons in this category.

As I have no children of my own to raise toward adulthood my small contribution to revitalizing an adult culture is to make fun of YPs and their foibles wherever and whenever possible.

Ira Katz [send him mail] teaches mechanical engineering at Lafayette College. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

~ G. K. Chesterton

For years I have used this quote in conversation and attributed it to G. K. Chesterton. When I searched for the citation I found that he didn’t exactly say such a thing (read an interesting discussion on this topic). Well, even if the great Chesterton didn’t say it exactly, it is still good. Chesterton was writing against the grain, during the ascendancy of modernity. The modernist project (perhaps not individual modernists) was to replace faith (belief) by the truths found by materialistic science. Certainly he was of the minority of the intelligentsia that questioned the validity of those pillars of modernity Freud, Marx, and Darwin. These days Freud, Marx and much else from the modernist progressives have been marginalized such that a strong current of our present day intelligentsia has moved beyond both the truths of faith and science to no truth whatsoever. In other words, they are postmodernists. However, science and scientists still hold the high ground of debate, symbolically with their champion Darwin, over most issues of the day. The gist of their argument is that the term "blind faith" is redundant; that is, faith precludes reason. Bob Murphy made this point in his recent piece, noting the arguments of Darwinists against the Intelligent Designers are typically ad hominem or beg the question. Even more anecdotally, my atheist friend at the pub cannot imagine how anyone could believe in God and thinks that those who do so are narrow-minded. Of course the fact that he cannot imagine how the vast majority of human beings, both alive and dead, have thought does not make him narrow-minded.

But really, there are very few atheists. Most people more closely follow the aphorism I incorrectly quoted above. Environmentalists have faith in Gaia; it is not difficult to find and participate in witch covens or pagan rites; there are multitudes that worship the state (read LRC); there are sports fanatics that have great faith in their teams; good old hedonists that worship pleasure; and many more that will come to your mind as you read this. There is certainly much faith in science itself. But the atheists and scientists do not really attack faith in general, faith being defined as belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. They don’t even really attack religious faith. Of course those Muslim fundamentalists are bad, but they don’t speak for true Islam. The only faith that is really attacked is Christian faith. It is the only faith that one can readily insult in public with no politically correct ramifications.

I am prompted to write due to the recent court ruling regarding the teaching of intelligent design and the several articles posted on LRC regarding the topic. I believe this debate is best understood in terms of the much older debate regarding faith and reason; how they are symbiotic, how they are antagonistic. How can a man have faith and still use his reason? It seems to me this is a fundamental question of the age and has been a fundamental question of all ages. As such I have thought about this topic myself for many years and will report on several of my musings here.

The intelligentsia (e.g., the New York Times) typically thinks that believers are pitiful dolts who must follow what their priest (con artist) tells them; that they believe without reason. First of all, this is not the true Christian tradition. Jesus said “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.” (Matthew 22:37) This is the most important law, that people must use their minds; they must have faith through reason.

Even during the Medieval Age of Faith the place of reason was recognized. In the Paradiso St. Peter examined Dante on the reason for his faith.

“Were the world to Christianity converted,”
I said, “withouten miracles, this one
Is such, the rest are not its hundredth part;

Dante’s reply is an old argument (originally attributed to St. Augustine) but still a valid one: the fact that Christianity spread is the proof of its truth. Imagine being persuaded to have faith in a God, remember you are not a child but an adult who has been raised as a pagan, such that you will be rewarded in the after life. In this life you not only will not be rewarded in the material sense, but rather will be persecuted terribly. What could convince a person to follow such a creed: a miracle, or at least a good reason.

The confrontation between faith and reason, or as Tertullian put it between Jerusalem and Athens, was considered by St. Thomas Aquinas. St. Thomas was the foremost proponent of reconciling Aristotle (Athens and reason) with faith (Jerusalem). I would argue that he succeeded in this, his life’s work, such that Aquinas is as much a father of science as anyone because he put reason in its proper place alongside faith instead of against it. His great work, the Summa Theologica, is much in the style of the scientific method: hypothesis (question), evidence (experiment in science, checking true sources for Aquinas), reconciling the hypothesis with evidence. Aquinas’ effort is in disrepute today because modern culture has fouled his work by reversing the medieval problem of the reconciliation of faith and reason in that faith is now ignored. It seems to me that a modern Aquinas is required today to once again harmonize faith and reason.

Of course, the greatest confrontation between faith and reason, or more accurately faith and science, in our time has been over creation. How did the world and ourselves come into being, and thus, what is our place in the world? And here is where the issue of intelligent design presents itself.

As I understand the scientific facts, they do lead me believe that the earth is older than 6000 years and there has been evolution of the various species. Thus, I am not a fundamentalist and I think it is a mistake to attempt to literally interpret the Bible. One should not look in the Bible for scientific facts; one should look in the Bible for truth. That is I think the Bible is True.

The key truth in Genesis is that God made man in his own image. Dr. Leon Kass, the well-known ethicist and former chairman of the President’s Council on Bioethics, expresses this concept very well in the following, another old passage the source of which is now lost to me.

How is man God-like? Genesis 1 — where it is first said that man is created in God’s image-introduces us to the divine activities and powers: (1) God speaks, commands, names and blesses; (2) God makes and makes freely; (3) Gods looks at and beholds the world; (4) God is concerned with the goodness or perfection of things; (5) God addresses solicitously other living creatures. In short: God exercises speech and reason, freedom in doing and making, and the powers of contemplation, judgment, and care.

Doubters may wonder whether this is truly the case about God — after all, it is only on biblical authority that we regard God as possessing these powers and activities. But it is certain that we human beings have them, and that they lift us above the plane of a merely animal existence. Human beings, alone among the earthly creatures, speak, plan, create, contemplate, and judge. Human beings, alone among the creatures, can articulate a future goal and bring it into being by their own purposive conduct. Human beings, alone among the creatures, can think about the whole, marvel at its articulated order, and feel awe in beholding its grandeur and in pondering the mystery of its source.

It is the God-like characteristics of man that have made him the master of the planet. I wonder why no other creature exhibits these characteristics that are the most favorable to survival. Such favorable characteristics as swiftness, keen eyesight, strength and smell are present across the spectrum of the different species. But why is man the only “product of a long, unconscious, impersonal, material process” which exhibits the most favorable trait. Here we come to the nub of the question. The question of why we are and what we are.

I once noted that the famous paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould believed that evolution is no “ladder of progress.” In fact, if we started the process again from the primordial ooze there is very little chance that vertebrates, let alone man, would come into being. What is the probability that the meteor (or volcanic activity) should have killed the dinosaurs at the interface of the Cretaceous and Tertiary periods allowing man to come into being? There are no scientific techniques that can be applied to answer the question.

For me truth in the Bible gives answers to fundamental questions such as why man lives and a prescription of how man should live. These answers found in the Bible are matters of faith, as there is no reason to live any particular way if we are simply a bag of chemicals.

What I would add is the fact that even the strongest proponent of reason builds his beliefs on faith. For example, there are those who find it difficult to balance a checkbook yet completely believe sermons of modern science. It is not possible with their limited understanding to comprehend science with reason so they rely on faith. Many of us who have had training in the sciences can see through the smoke and mirrors of much of modern science. I even find myself on occasion agreeing with the postmodernists that big science, funded by the government, is on the whole political. On the other hand, these same people who question faith will not use their reason in considering the nonmaterial aspects of life. Nobody actually lives by the purely materialistic ethic. Dickens did create a ridiculously practical character Mr. Bounderby who lived by this ethic in his novel Hard Times. Even the philosopher of death Peter Singer is kind and caring to his sick mother. Everyone I have known when pressed will admit there are many aspects of life not understood through materialistic means. Certainly the many aspects of love fall in this category. All around us in our everyday life we can see evidence of the truth of the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount. It is true that it must be taken on faith that Jesus rose from the dead, but I have found to be true all from the Bible testable by everyday experience.

But there are the political systems and political actors that have arisen based on the materialistic worship of power. Consider the following “evolutionist view of man” as expressed by a Harvard paleontologist:

Man stands alone in the universe, a unique product of a long, unconscious, impersonal, material process with unique understanding and potentialities. These he owes to no-one but himself, and it is to himself that he is responsible. He is not the creature of uncontrollable and undeterminable forces, but his own master. He can and must decide and manage his own destiny.

These words I read and noted many years ago, but I do not recall the citation. But their power still echoes through my mind like the sound of the goose-stepping legions of the twentieth century. Here is the creed of the guillotine, the gulag and the gas chamber. Here is the creed of those who would attempt to remake man.

In this age faith is held in low esteem, reason rules the day. However, the truths of faith are of more value than the facts of reason. Aquinas said it well: “the fact that some happen to doubt about the articles of faith is not due to the uncertain nature of the truths, but to the weakness of the human intellect; yet the slenderest knowledge that may be obtained of the highest things is more desirable than the most certain knowledge of the lowest things.”

Ira Katz [send him mail] teaches mechanical engineering at Lafayette College. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

It is instructive to consider why a town that has not lost its architectural heritage is unique in this country. Perhaps the greatest observer of the American condition was Alexis de Tocqueville who toured here in 1831. In his famous book Democracy in America he writes about our national character that follows from our faith in progress.

It can hardly be believed how many facts naturally flow from the philosophical theory of the indefinite perfectibility of man or how strong an influence it exercises even on those who, living entirely for the purposes of action and not of thought, seem to conform their actions to it without knowing anything about it.

I accost an American sailor and inquire why the ships of his country are built so as to last for only a short time; he answers without hesitation that the art of navigation is every day making such rapid progress that the finest vessel would become almost useless if it lasted beyond a few years. In these words, which fell accidentally, and on a particular subject, from an uninstructed man, I recognize the general systematic idea upon which a great people direct all their concerns.

Thus we don’t build structures with the expectation that they will last beyond a lifetime, we don’t maintain them to last, and we knock them down when they show a bit of wear. I think this aspect of our national character is harmful for our society and culture. A positive effect of maintaining an architectural legacy is that a perception of history is sustained in the people because the reminders of the past are a part of everyday life. The American infatuation with the automobile has certainly hastened the demise of the older, human scale architecture. Thus, the nonhuman scale is that designed for automobiles. In England, for example, the old towns, actually just about everywhere, were designed for people to attend to their tasks on foot or horse. A high street with small shops selling staples, a bank, a post office, and two or three pubs are within walking distance of the vast majority of English homes. One can survive quite well there without a car. In America it is required that businesses provide parking, and large roads are built with tax dollars that in effect are subsidies for large businesses. Walking to attend to daily errands in most places in the United States is virtually impossible because of distance and impassable roads. Furthermore, our lives have lost much of the human regard for place because most of America looks alike, as the new construction is most likely to be for national chains. And because we get in our cars to shop at those large chain stores where we never know the shopkeepers, much of the daily social intercourse between people has been lost in our society.

But Easton is different and that is why I like it. The old architecture and the human scale, along with the natural beauty of rivers and hills make it a wonderful place for an urban hike (in spite of the blight running through it called US 22 that is a monument to the evil practice of eminent domain). Local historians must provide the story of how and why the architecture has survived over the decades. But I understand part of the story of the slow but steady rejuvenation of many of the buildings here over the last 15 years. This part of the story concerns my favorite place in Easton, the southwest corner of Northampton and 7th streets where Porters’ Pub is located.

Some of you may remember the old Judy Garland and Mickey Rooney movies of the 30s where a group of kids decide to raise money by putting on a show. The next scene would depict an extravagant musical production. It beggared belief that a group of kids put on a show like that. I imagine the scene being much the same when the Porter brothers decided to undertake the project of restoring an old building, in a bad neighborhood of an economically depressed city, while furthermore starting a viable restaurant in that location, when most new restaurants fail even in good locations. Larry and Ken were in their early twenties and Jeff was still a teenager. It is still difficult to believe that such a young group was able to make a business like this succeed.

From the moment I first saw and then entered Porters’ I felt it would be the place for me in Easton. The building dates from 1833, and is restored to reflect its age. The interior maintains the traditional ambiance with stone and brick walls, a wood floor, and is highlighted by a mahogany bar that beckons the thirsty traveler for a libation and a conversation. Another striking and unique feature of the interior is what at first glance appears to be a pewter ceiling, but in reality are the over 2000 mugs owned by patrons who have earned a mug by drinking 60 beers from around the world and from distinctive micro brews across the US.

The Porters, with their pub, and other buildings in Easton, have led the drive to restore instead of destroy the architectural legacy of Easton. The dictionary defines an institution as a significant practice, relationship, or organization in a society or culture. The pub opened in 1990; in the restaurant business this is an institution. There is another venerable pub in an old building in Easton that I know, Bachman’s Public House. It is restored to its 18th century look and is now used for historical instruction. It is nice, but it would be infinitely better if one could actually drink a beer there.

For all of my adult life I have had a local joint, la Cheers, that I call mine own. Perhaps it is scandalous to admit it, but I have met many of my best friends at a bar. A pub is one of the few places left in our culture where it is not considered weird to strike up a conversation with a stranger. And peculiarly, I find the pub the best place to read and write.

I believe a necessary, and most important condition for a great pub is an active owner who gives the place its personality. The Porter brothers each give a unique aspect to the personality of the bar, the staff and the clientele. But Ken’s wife Stacey, who is a manager, is most influential in infusing the atmosphere with just plain fun, while maintaining the standards of a well-run restaurant. I suppose I should mention that the menu spans the range from pub food to fine dining. I have found the food always good and sometimes excellent.

Perhaps my favorite pastime at the pub, in all of Easton, is to sit outside in my little corner of Europe, drinking Yeungling (the local brew), and reading. O.K., it is a stretch to call the three small tables on Northampton St. anything like Europe. In fact it seems a rough neighborhood to some, but as a true theater of life, along with the rough comes the nice, the interesting, and the humorous.

A version of this article appeared in a local magazine, The Elucidator.

Ira Katz [send him mail] teaches mechanical engineering at Lafayette College. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

A couple of years ago I taught American engineering students in Brussels. I lived near the Cinquantenaire Park where there is a rather quaint military museum.It is quaint, because the displays are amateurish by typical US standards; however, the collection is good, especially with pieces from the Napoleonic wars (Waterloo is nearby) and the two world wars. It is pleasant to visit on a quiet afternoon to watch the Belgian school children as well as to view the exhibits. In a manner, the museum makes war seem fun, a great game.

Our group visited the American Military Cemetery at Hamm, Luxembourg. The immaculate rows of graves, the chapel, the monuments depicting the campaigns of the fallen, and the grave of General Patton make this a special place. The majority of these valiant soldiers had perished during the Battle of the Bulge as the cemetery is located in the Arden Forest. One could not help but to desire to die for the US and to be buried at a place like this.

Only about one mile away is a Cemetery for German Soldiers at Sandweiler. Here the grounds are not so immaculate, there are four corpses buried under each stone, and of course they were the enemy fighting for Hitler’s Germany. Yet it is still moving, especially noting the young age of many of the victims, younger than the college students I was traveling with.

War is certainly not all fun, and nor even all honor and glory. There are victims, not only enemy soldiers, but totally innocent and defenseless civilians. I saw this depicted in two very famous paintings on a trip to Madrid to visit another group of students. In the Prado Museum is the painting the "Execution on May 3rd, 1808" by Francisco de Goya.

In this scene Spanish citizens are being executed by French soldiers after a rebellion. Nearby at the Reina Sofía, Spain’s national museum of modern art, is the mural "Guernica" by Pablo Picasso.

This abstract vision of the population of the town of Guernica being bombed by the German Luftwaffe during the Spanish civil war is perhaps the most well-known image depicting the horror of modern war.

A very different wartime museum is located a few miles north of Brussels in the prosperous, little, Flemish town of Mechelen. The dean of the college I was teaching at was a proud citizen; so he wanted me to see his town. The Mechelen Museum of Deportation and Resistance is located in the very building that was the starting point for the road to Auschwitz. What are most poignant for me are the pictures and stories of the individual victims. The victims depicted by Picasso are abstract, by Goya foreign; but the family photos with victims tinted in red, are horrifying because you can easily imagine your own photos so marked. To personalize the events gives them the most impact.

All of these experiences have crystallized in my mind the design for a different type of museum for war remembrance. What people should remember is that in war one’s soul can be in greater danger than one’s life. Even when fighting for a righteous cause, the nature of war is to kill or be killed, true enemies or innocent victims. Fighting in a foreign land within a foreign culture, differentiation is difficult if not impossible. What is the greater horror, to be the victim or the perpetrator of a war crime?

Murder in war is not by faceless, evil people, but by you and me if put into a similar situation. Goya does not show us the faces of the firing squad. Picasso shows no cause for the horror and anguish. But those French soldiers might have been artists themselves. The German bomber crews certainly loved their own mothers, wives and children who resembled their victims. The soldiers rationalize the murders because they are taught to do so by politicians. It is literally part of their training to dehumanize the enemy soldiers and civilians alike. We should know now that those rationalizations have been shown historically to be largely fabrications. For example, the British propagandized that the Germans were killing Belgian babies to convince the US to enter WWI. Similarly, we were told that the Iraqi soldiers were pulling the plugs on child incubators in Kuwait during the Gulf war. Consider how the adjacent images make Arabs think of us. The first is a marine is killing a wounded prisoner in a mosque in Fallujah and the second is a NASA satellite image of "Shock and Awe" over Baghdad.

We should understand that our troops are in serious moral danger when Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco could state with no irony and with none taken, that National Guard troops recently returned from Iraq "have M-16s, and they’re locked and loaded,” “These troops know how to shoot and kill, and they are more than willing to do so, and I expect they will.” How can we train fellow citizens to be more than willing to kill!

A proper war museum would be like the one in Mechelen, but now it would follow the lives, even the personalities, of soldiers who in war became murderers. Perhaps we could read the poignant letter of a soldier to his mother the day before he murders someone else’s mother. The point is to make society, individual citizens, be afraid of war. To make people always remember that war should not be natural but is evil, that it is the antithesis of civilization, that we should not look for glory and honor in killing an enemy thousands of miles from home. This museum should remind us to pray to "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil."

Ira Katz [send him mail] teaches mechanical engineering at Lafayette College. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

Looking at a chart of the dollar is like looking at an EKG of a dying man. From 1800 until 1935 the lines go up and down. A dollar bought a dollar’s worth of goods and services in 1800…in 1850…in 1900…and up until about 1935. At that point, the line begins to fall. It does not rise again. Instead, each and every year it loses purchasing power, so that by 2005 the 1800 dollar is only worth about 5 cents.

So Bonner puts the date at 1935, the culprit being that archfiend Roosevelt. Certainly he would be present on my Mount Rushmore of pillage. Lincoln (introducing the greenback and so much more!) and Nixon (breaking the last link to gold) belong up there. And if we allow for others besides presidents, our Maestro Greenspan deserves recognition. But the number one pillager is President Woodrow Wilson, the great fuddy-duddy, holier-than-thou destroyer of civilizations. It was under his watch that the Federal Reserve Bank was created.

Consider the CPI data from EH.net (Economic History) plotted below. It gives the equivalent current dollars to a dollar in 1790. Thus, as the number goes up the value of the dollar goes down. A word of caution as to the accuracy (or value) of economic statistics such as these is necessary even for readers of this site. I have seen several attempts to measure inflation, all of them lacking in many ways. But all of them agree on the issue at hand. While the destruction of value after 1935 is of monumental proportions, we Austrian economic devotees know the mechanism. In the details of the data we note that over the 123 years between 1790 and 1913 the lowest value of $1.78 occurred in 1865 after the greatest war and destruction of our history. But after the Fed, in the peace and prosperity of 1921, the value collapsed to $2.18. In the midst of the depression the value did pick up to $1.49 in 1935 in spite of the attempts of the Fed to inflate. And of course, as it is said, the rest is history.

But I cannot write about Mr. Bonner’s work without giving an example of how much I agree with him. In The Tyranny of the Living he writes:

The trouble with the news is that it is impossible to know what is important when you must rely solely on the judgment of people who happen to be breathing. The living can imagine no problems more urgent than the ones they confront right now, and no opportunities greater than the ones right in front of them. We prefer the obituaries.

As a student in high school and college I used to make a point of reading the paper, in detail, every day. I eventually realized that it was a waste of time. I had friends who worked for USA Today, for the only useful section, the sports. In the newsroom a television was always tuned to CNN. They told me that the news does not change in 30 minutes. It occurred to me that it also does not change in 24 hours. Most of the stories on major events literally say nothing new. If one also considers the fact that most newspaper writing itself is terrible and infused with ignorance, it is not difficult to reach the conclusion that reading the paper is a waste of time. I quit reading the newspaper cold turkey. I have often tried to explain my decision to others. I am trained as an engineer so my explanation has a technical nature. The news is a measurement of history where the frequency of sampling the signal is at such a high frequency as only to perceive the noise. It is much more important to understand the lower frequency scales of years, decades, generations, and centuries. So now I generally just read books, a few quarterly periodicals, and, of course, LRC (which has so much wisdom that it can be read daily). But even for books, my guideline is to only read those written at least 50 years ago. I will end this piece with a quote from one of those old books, Remembrance of Things Past (or In Search of Lost Time?) by Marcel Proust, (translated by Moncrieff, Random House, v.1, p. 20)

“I say!” exclaimed Swann to my grandfather, “what I was going to tell you has more to do than you might think with what you were asking me just now, for in some respects there has been very little change. I came across a passage in Saint-Simon this morning which would have amused you. It is in the volume which covers his mission to Spain; not one of the best, little more in fact than a journal, but at least it is a journal wonderfully well written, which fairly distinguishes it from the devastating (sic) journalism that we feel bound to read these days, morning, noon and night.”

“I do not agree with you: there are some days when I find reading the papers very pleasant indeed!" my aunt Flora broke in, to show Swann that she had read the note about his Corot in the ‘Figaro.’

“Yes,” aunt Celine went one better. “When they write things about people whom we are interested.”

“I don’t deny it,” answered Swann in some bewilderment. “The fault I find with our journalism is that it forces us to take an interest in some fresh triviality or other every day, whereas only three or four books in a lifetime give us anything that is of real importance. Suppose that, every morning when we tore the wrapper off our paper with fevered hands, a transmutation were to take place, and we were to find inside it — oh! I don’t know; shall we say Pascal’s ‘Pensees?’”

Ira Katz [send him mail] teaches mechanical engineering at Lafayette College. He is the co-author of Handling Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and Introduction to Fluid Mechanics.

My
image of the Poconos had been the cheesy summer vacation destination
in the 50s for baked city dwellers from New York and Philadelphia.
I still think it is on the cheesy side. The highest point is about
2600 ft. They show the wear of an industrious civilization; the
old and new scars of mining have not healed. Our destination was
the town of Jim Thorpe, (formerly known as Mauch Chunk which means
“Mountain of the Sleeping Bear,” the name the Leni Lenape Indians
gave to the nearby mountain). The historic district is picturesque
with many restored Victorian buildings, as the 19th century
was the economic heyday for the town. Mauch Chunk was a center for
coal mining and railroads and eventually for tourism. But as the
industries declined the town did also. The Olympian never visited
Mauch Chunk, but his wife was shopping for a suitable site for his
remains. As a ploy to draw tourists the town fathers accepted her
offer, built a monument to him, and changed the name of their town
in 1954. But typical of a government sponsored economic initiative,
the decline continued and it was not until the 1980s when the architectural
restoration began that tourists returned.

We
took the tour of the Asa Packer Mansion that was built in 1860.
Asa Packer (1805–1879), a self-made man, who started his career
in Mauch Chunk as an apprentice boat builder, became a millionaire
founding boatyards, construction and mining companies, the Lehigh
Valley Railroad, and Lehigh University. His three-story Victorian
Italianate building, preserved with the original furnishings, is
nice, with many features produced by European artisans. But this
19th century mansion is smaller and less extravagant
in some ways (e.g., kitchen and bathrooms) than the typical 5000
square feet suburban house of the early 21st century
housing bubble. Packer built another Victorian mansion next to his
for his son that was the basis for Disney's Haunted Mansion.

The
day after I had driven my Dutch friends to the Newark airport I
was on my way back there to fly to Colorado with my friend Jim.
We were visiting Scott and Megan, and their children Jackson and
Ella in Crested Butte. (A butte is a hill that rises abruptly from
the surrounding area and has sloping sides and a flat top, so a
crested butte is a bit of an oxymoron.) Scott, an old student of
Jim's, was living in Easton with his family for several months.
We were immediate friends because on our first meeting at the pub
he talked about von Mises and the Austrian school.

Crested
Butte is a cuter, nicer town than Jim Thorpe. The scenery is spectacular,
with Crested Butte Mountain being just one of the peaks surrounding
the old mining town. The substantial real estate bubble there has
forced the typical, moderate-sized home over a million dollars.
The Colorado mountains seem young, hard and sharp, while also very
beautiful.

Our
visit consisted of eating drinking, walking, hiking and climbing.
I thoroughly enjoyed the first of the four activities listed, but
climbing is another matter. Here are my definitions.

Walk:
relatively short with small elevation changes

Hike:
longer than a walk with significant elevation changes

Climb:
extensive use of the hands and feet due to severe elevation changes

Climbing
is exhilarating, challenging, demanding, tough, great exercise,
character building, etc.; but it is not fun. And as the evolutionary
progress of homo sapiens included the development from quadrupedal
to bipedal motion, climbing is a backwards step. On the first day
we (Scott carrying Ella in a special backpack, Jim and me) hiked
a mile or two along trails on the other side of the mountain from
the town. The most difficult part was fording a fast, cold stream.
We hiked up to a nice stop that afforded seats for us to consume
our simple lunch while enjoying a beautiful view. The next day was
the ascent up the Ruby Range to about 13,000 ft. Scott drove us
in his jeep as far up the trail as possible. From the bottom, the
ridgeline that was our destination it did not look that far, and
the route did not look difficult. But as we proceeded above the
snowline the terrain became steep and steeper such that the last
100 ft or so was a climb. Over the summit of the ridgeline was an
even steeper precipice. I was tired and felt compelled to hug the
rock where I had stopped. Even the ant that crawled up my butt (not
butte), that I could feel relieving my traveler's constipation,
could make me move. We did not make it to the ultimate summit because
of the threat of rain and the fact that I refused to go any higher.
You might think I have exaggerated the difficulty and danger of
this climb if you knew that Scott had carried Ella again. And as
I was hugging the rock she was standing around eating a sandwich.
However that evening the bar tender, whose day job is a guide, confirmed
my opinion of the difficulty of the route. Furthermore, I was shocked
to learn that there is an old mining road to the peak from a different
direction!

Scott
and Megan were living in Easton for those few months because their
son Jackson has been very ill. In fact, if it were not for their
intelligence, patience, persistence, courage, economic resources,
and most of all, love, Jackson would not be alive today. They believe
they have finally found a physician who has properly diagnosed the
illness and who has prescribed a proper treatment. My hope is to
return to Crested Butte for a visit, more to see the grandeur of
the love of parents for a healthy boy than of those magnificent
mountains.

After
I had made reservations for the Colorado trip, I was asked to accompany
students of the Lafayette chapter of Engineers Without Borders to
the village of Lagunitas, Yoro district, Honduras. My trip from
Crested Butte to Lagunitas began with a four-hour drive to the Denver
airport. The flight from Denver to Newark was rerouted to Cleveland
due to thunderstorms. After a short stay for refueling we left for
Newark, arriving about 1:00 AM. I went with Jim to the car, changed
bags, and returned to the terminal. My flight to Houston departed
at 6:00 AM. I arrived in San Pedro Sula in Honduras at about 11:00
AM (1:00 PM Eastern time). I was met at the airport by two of the
students who had arrived a week earlier with another professor.
They showed me the way on the two-hour bus ride and subsequent 20-minute
hike up to the village. All of the buses in Honduras are old school
buses from the US. The drivers fly down the mountain roads, passing
as many as 6 cars at a time by my count. The roads have no guardrails
and the rains have washed out several sections. In total, the travel
time from Crested Butte to Lagunitas was about 29 hours.

The
students were working on a project to design and help construct
a water distribution system for the village. The source is a spring
about one mile away across the mountain. During previous visits
the students did a topographical survey and researched specific
needs of the villagers. The villagers had dug a trench by hand that
one-mile across the undulating mountain from the spring to the village.
It is an impressive bit of work. Still to be constructed are a storage
tank and the local distribution system within the village.

In
teaching design I have contended that engineering is a humanity;
if you do not take into consideration the people for whom you are
designing and the people who will be building the design, then it
is unlikely that a good design will result. Thus, other disciplines,
such as cultural studies, economics, language and communication
must be part of a proper engineering education. The EWB project
in Lagunitas is the best engineering project I have ever been associated
with in that the usually implicit requirement that engineering design
be complimented with other disciplines is obvious.

Also
no project I have ever worked on, including during my time as a
practicing engineer, was more important to the user than that water
system is to the people of Lagunitas. The complete role of an engineer
was encapsulated in the meeting of the students with the water board,
where the options for the community were explained in Spanish. I
am proud of the work ethic and professionalism exhibited by the
students.

The
approximately 230 villagers live in houses, usually in groups of
2 or 3, spread over a half-mile radius of the mountainous terrain,
the peaks being about 3000 ft. The 400–500 ft2 houses
are constructed with adobe walls, tin roofs and dirt floors. There
is no power. There is an existing spring-fed water system such that
a limited number of the houses have a single tap, but there is only
enough water for drinking, cooking and hand washing. There is no
bathing or sewage in the village. The new water system will provide
for all of the houses, but still will be limited to drinking, cooking
and hand washing. The common latrine was upon a slope that required
a little climb (i.e., the use of a hand) to reach it. The dirt,
smell, and insects in the little box made me welcome my traveler's
constipation. The grounds around the houses consisted of dirt and
trash. Milling around and within the houses on the dirt and trash
were chickens, dogs, an occasional pig, transient horses and burrows,
and many barefoot children.

Each
village is a reflection of the indigenous tribes that existed before
the Spanish colonization. I was told that in some of the villages
the people do not speak Spanish but an aboriginal dialect. Also
each village is akin to a tribe or clan; perhaps all the inhabitants
of a particular village are related to each other.

The
living conditions for the students and me were primitive but better
than those for the villagers. Our hut was relatively luxurious,
with concrete block walls and a concrete floor. Every meal was primarily
beans, rice and tortillas, with a small side of meat.

As
no water in Honduras is safe for North Americans, we had bottled
water available. For protection against disease I had 4 shots (tetanus,
hepatitis, typhoid, and polio), took malaria pills, and had the
antibiotic ciprofloxacin for traveler's disease (which I needed
to take once at the end of the trip while in the beach town of Tela).
To avoid insect bites I had a repellant that was 100% deet. It was
like taking a petroleum dip. But it was effective, and as the English
medical student who was touring Central America we met stated, the
100% deet was valuable like gold because it was impossible to find
there.

San
Pedro Sula (the name Sula derives from the local dialect Usula,
which means “valley of birds”) is the worst city I have ever visited.
The air is polluted and the streets are dirty. There is a large
bustling market but there is nothing of quality or interest. One
of the student's backpack was pilfered during the 10-minute walk
from the bus to the hotel (my room was like a cell) during the middle
of the day. However, the airport is nice, it being the only nice
place I saw in Honduras.

Our
hut was adjacent to the home of Porfirio. He is the leading citizen
of the village. He is intelligent, ambitious and hard working; as
well as being very friendly with a quick and hearty laugh. If he
were born in the United States he certainly would own his business
or be the mayor of his town. In other words, he should have become
wealthy like Asa Packer did in 19th century Pennsylvania,
but he lives in a shack with no toilet and no power. Why is life
so perverse?

The
mountains in Honduras in August are beautifully green and lush.
The butterflies are extraordinary. But in truth, the country is
dirty and ugly. It was rare, nonexistent in Lagunitas, to see any
attempt to create or maintain an aesthetically pleasing environment.
There is very little decoration, nor plants or flowers. The architecture
is shoddy and completely functional. No attempt is made to control
litter to the point that it is difficult to find a trashcan in the
country. We carried out our trash when we left the village for the
final time. Porfirio suggested that we chuck it off the side of
the road down the mountain. Individual dress was similar, all function
and no form. It was the rare exception to see a woman who attempted
to look good, even in the city. Furthermore, people rarely washed
or changed clothes.

I
am certainly not the first to observe that beauty follows wealth.
The absence of beauty is depressing. It seems ingrained in the culture,
but perhaps is better explained economically. If one is just subsisting,
how can it be justified to expend resources on "nonfunctional"
beauty? An exception that was like a spot of color in a black and
white image was Porfirio's 12-year old daughter Kinya. She wore
more than one outfit while I was in the village. She wore earrings.
Even her bearing was more refined. In a word, she is elegant.

In
Lagunitas economic laws are easily observed compared to modern industrial
society because the division of labor is primitive. The villagers
do most of the work, and make and grow most of the goods they use
and consume. The broken window fallacy would be absurd to them.
When hurricane Mitch devastated Honduras in 1998 it did not cross
anybody's mind that the rebuilding would be good for the economy
as they had to do all of the work themselves to return to the status
quo. During the rebuilding they lost work in the fields. Spending
scarce capital on rebuilding materials required sacrifices in other
areas. Only with an advanced division of labor does it seem the
economy grows because the glazer or carpenter has more work. It
also struck me when I heard the description of the terrible conditions
that the survivors of Katrina endured: lack of water, food, sanitation,
heat, and insects; that these were typical of what the villagers
endured everyday.

They
also understand the basic economic laws of price and supply and
demand. When a new project was discussed with the villagers of Lafortuna,
Porfirio emphasized to them that they must charge each household
individually even though it was a community project. He knew that
a commodity priced below the market level would soon be scarce.

As
you probably have surmised Honduras is a poor country, the poorest
country I have visited. I have been to very poor parts of Mexico,
but also saw very nice neighborhoods there. I am sure there must
be nice places where the elite live in Honduras, but I did not see
them. Why are they so poor? Certainly they lack access to capital
and are engaged in a limited division of labor. Both of these conditions
are necessary to the accumulation of wealth but are difficult to
achieve for isolated communities.

I
referred to Tela above. We spent the last day of the trip at the
beach. The Hondurans would like to make Tela another Cancun. The
water is wonderful but the beaches have plenty of flotsam and jetsam
washed up from the sea, or perhaps just discarded by the locals.
There are a couple of decent hotels, but this town is also ramshackle
and dirty. However, we did have one wonderful meal on a lagoon adjacent
to the beach. We could observe a man carrying our lunch in a bucket,
several healthy fish (perhaps mullet) into the cabana. They were
fried whole and served with rice, beans, salad, and beautifully,
lightly fried plantains. Eating this meal, sipping on a cold Vida
Salva cerveza that cost 10 Lempiras (about 50) with a view of the
Caribbean, I could think Honduras was a wonderful place.

Built in 1860,
the home of Asa Packer, founder of the Lehigh Valley Railroad and
Lehigh University. The mansion is not a restoration; it is essentially
in the same condition as the Packers lived in it from 1861 to 1912.

Students surveying
in the tropical jungle-like valleys.

The
highlands where there are even pine trees.

A typical
house in the village.

September
17, 2005

Ira
Katz [send him mail] teaches
mechanical engineering at Lafayette College.  He is the co-author
of Handling
Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and
Introduction
to Fluid Mechanics.

It
is art because it depicts truths about the human condition. Furthermore,
the film depicts these truths in a beautiful way, which goes against
the grain of modern art. In fact, going against the grain is a theme
of the movie.

The
movie loosely describes the experiences of the director Armando
Robles Godoy. The film opens with one of the most beautiful love
scenes I have ever seen. As the rain is destroying their potential
for economic security in the jungle, Mario and his wife Delba respond
to their anxiety by making love. The mosquito netting around their
bed becomes a cloud, and the troubles of the world are left behind.
They are brought back to earth by the plea of their son Romulo for
a drink of water.

As
told through flashbacks, Mario became disenchanted with life in
Lima while many of his countrymen are moving to the city. He decided
to take advantage of a government program for homesteading in the
jungle. Despite the fears of Delba, and the protests of family and
friends, he moves his family to the house he has built in the jungle.

A
major theme of Latin American literature is the battle against nature.
In this case the jungle, the eponymous Green Wall, certainly is
a difficult host to the family. But it is also beautiful and fertile.
At times a Bach air is played to evoke a sense of tranquil beauty
when jungles scenes are shown.

However,
the greatest danger, the greatest obstacle, to the family's well
being is the government bureaucracy that is supposed to help the
settlers. During a Kafkaesque series of frustrations, Mario attempted
to gain title to his land. The individual bureaucrats recognized
his heroism (he could be described as a Randian hero, he tells the
clerk he wants "to produce"), even if they also believed
it was tragic and misplaced. Thus they did try to help him on occasion.
As he finally learns that the proper form has been signed and he
owns the property another group of government workers make a boundary
through Mario's land, purposely destroying his coffee plants. This
is in spite of the fact that he had previously informed the bureaucracy
of the error in placing the boundary through his claim.

The
waste, hypocrisy, and harm that the government causes the people
are illustrated by way of the subplot of a presidential tour of
the district. The presidential motorcade wound its way like a serpent
toward the town closest to Mario's house. It bodes danger, like
the snake that is also shown moving through the jungle grass towards
the home. Among the examples are that the road is only repaired
for the president, and will not be maintained after he leaves. The
presidential entourage visits the local agriculture station. The
staff proudly displays a large palm fruit for the president. In
a side comment we learn that they have spent 20 years working on
this project. Furthermore, farmers like Mario do not even grow palm
fruit, thus they believe it is not profitable to produce. In the
end, this tour hinders the family in an emergency causing tragic
results.

The
film reinforced my observations
from a recent visit to South America; the gist being the misfortune
of good, intelligent people who are checked in their economic advancement
because of government.

May
17, 2005

Ira
Katz [send him mail] teaches
mechanical engineering at Lafayette College.  He is the co-author
of Handling
Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and
Introduction
to Fluid Mechanics.

I
believe freedom is, and should be, limited. Freedom of the individual
is limited by the nature of our species and the nature of each of
us as individuals. Many writers from ancient history, such as Moses,
to modern times, for example Jose Ortega y Gasset, have expressed
this fundamental truth. Two relevant passages from Ortega y Gasset's
classic The
Revolt of the Masses (1930) are given below.

It
is not that one ought not to do just what one pleases;
it is simply that one cannot do other than what each of us has
to do, has to be. The only way out is to refuse to do what
has to be done, but this does not set us free to do something
else just because it pleases us. In this matter we only posses
a negative freedom of will.

Without
commandments, obliging us to live after a certain fashion, our
existence is that of the "unemployed." This is the terrible
spiritual situation in which the best youth of the world finds
itself today. By dint of feeling itself free, exempt from restrictions,
it feels itself empty. An "unemployed" existence is
a worse negation of life than death itself. Because to live means
to have something definite to do – a mission to fulfill –
and in the measure in which we avoid setting our life to something,
we make it empty.

Recognizing
that freedom should be limited; by what human authority should liberty
be constrained? Edmund Burke addressed this question in his Letter
to a Member of the National Assembly (1791).

Men
are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their
disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites, – in
proportion as their love to justice is above their rapacity, – in
proportion as their soundness and sobriety of understanding
is above their vanity and presumption, – in proportion as they
are more disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and
good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. Society cannot
exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be
placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more
there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution
of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their
passions forge their fetters.

In
other words, the best society is one in which people are self-restrained.
But beyond the individual what are the "controlling powers"
that Burke refers to? First and foremost, of course, is the family,
both immediate and extended. Through the family society is able
to place great control on its members, especially children. But
the key to the success of the family is the fact that this control
is based on intimate knowledge of the individual and that the power
should be tempered by love.

Like
the force of a magnet weakens as an object is moved away from it,
as an individual moves away from the family societal power weakens
along with the knowledge of the individual. Of special note is that
beyond the family individuals put themselves under the power of
societal institutions voluntarily by choosing where to live and
what organizations to join. Thus comes the influence and controlling
power of friends and neighbors, schools, religion, employers, clubs,
and perhaps local covenants of neighborhood associations. I would
even argue that local governments could be included in this list
even though they do employ force. The nature of these institutions
in the case of traditional village life in Germany has been described
on LRC through the beautiful and evocative essays of Sabine
Barnhart.

The
role of society can be summarized by the famous passage of Burke
in his Reflections
on the Revolution in France (1790).

To
be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we
belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it
were) of public affections. It is the first link in the series
by which we proceed toward a love to our country and to mankind.

Even
though intellectuals such as Ortega y Gasset and Burke have described
these truths, they are not intellectual concepts. The limits to
individual freedom set by society are more likely to have been organically
grown than conceived. The particular need and value of traditions
is based on wisdom that is often beyond individual knowledge or
reason. The concept of organic knowledge can be understood through
the observation of French cuisine, which evolved by the layering
of knowledge and wisdom, generation upon generation. Individual
dishes invariably incorporate a remarkable set of ingredients or
techniques. The intricate knowledge of a great chef is amazing.
Yet, no individual or organization alone could have conceived it.
Of course individuals do invent new dishes and new techniques. But
they must be within the limits of nature. Reform is possible with
human society, but prudence is necessary. To simply be new and different
is usually to be fleeting and in error. Perhaps readers would agree
that much of modern art fits into the last category.

The
800-pound gorilla in the room is government, the institution that
controls through force. Instability of society, in fact of civilization
itself, is due to the pernicious nature of the power of central
government that increases as knowledge of the individual decreases.

A
recent article by Hans-Hermann
Hoppe described the phenomena of moral decay via government
intervention very well.

.
. . what should be clear by now is that most if not all of the
moral degeneration and cultural decline – the signs of decivilization
– all around us are the inescapable and unavoidable results
of the welfare state and its core institutions. Classical, old-style
conservatives knew this, and they vigorously opposed public education
and social security. They knew that states everywhere were intent
upon breaking down and ultimately destroying families and the
institutions and layers and hierarchies of authority that are
the natural outgrowth of family-based communities in order to
increase and strengthen their own power. They knew that in order
to do so states would have to take advantage of the natural rebellion
of the adolescent (juvenile) against parental authority. And they
knew that socialized education and socialized responsibility were
the means of bringing about this goal.

Social
education and social security provide an opening for the rebellious
youth to escape parental authority (to get away with continuous
misbehavior). Old conservatives knew that these policies would
emancipate the individual from the discipline imposed by family
and community life only to subject him instead to the direct and
immediate control of the state.

Many
other writers for LRC have touched on the importance of local institutions
for the creation and maintenance of civilization. For example, Jeffery
A. Tucker examined the thought of Albert J. Nock who believed
"that there is something profoundly wrong with the world, and
the biggest thing of all is the State. In Nock’s view, it is the
State that crowds out all that is decent, lovely, civilized. He
demonstrates this not through deduction but through calm and entertaining
tales of how rich and varied and productive life can be when the
State does not interfere." Furthermore, Nock thought that

In
a society without the State, for example, the “court of tastes
and manners” would be the thing that guides the operation of
society, and this “court” would have a much larger role in society
than law, legislation, or religion. If such a court were not
in operation, because people are too uncivilized or too ill-educated
to maintain it, there was nothing the State could do to uplift
people. No matter how low a civilization is, it can only be
made to go lower through State activity.

In
another example, Thomas E. Woods wrote about how Donald Livingston,
professor of philosophy at Emory University, regarded the modern
state in his discussion of The
Real Significance of the Civil War.

In
the modern age, Livingston observes, we have seen federative
polities giving way to modern states. A federative polity is
one in which a variety of smaller jurisdictions exist – like
families, voluntary organizations, towns and states, and in
medieval Europe institutions like guilds, universities, and
the Church. Each of these social authorities has powers and
rights of its own that the central government cannot overturn.
Each of them is also a potential source of corporate resistance
to the central government. Prior to the rise of the modern state,
political leaders who desired centralization therefore found
themselves up against the historic liberties of towns, guilds,
universities, the Church, and similar corporate bodies.

In
the United States this discussion has often been put in the terms
of state's rights as is even understood by a dubious character such
as Al Sharpton. On a recent Meet
the Press Sharpton compared aspects of the great tragedy
of race in the US to marriage laws. "Slave owners used what
you’re using. Let each state decide people’s rights rather than
have a federal government protect the rights of people. . . .I think
what we’re trying to see is the right wing to try to bring this
back to state’s rights, and I think that state’s rights is frightening
to those that have been victims by it." Of course, it is not
state's rights that is the real issue but the rule of constitutional
law. If the most powerful entities existing to check the federal
government have their authority usurped what will be the fate of
the hundreds of thousands of smaller entities? Of course history
has shown us the answer; there is no protection.

Thus,
I am a libertarian because I believe that virtually everything the
federal government does today works against the freedom of the individual
and the free institutions of society. Furthermore, it works against
the state and local government authority, while empowering them
to erode the freedom of the people and institutions. And I am a
reactionary because the limits on personal freedom imposed by society
have been under constant attack by government since at least the
Lincoln administration and thus there is much less to conserve than
there is to be regained. I must also say that depending upon my
mood and the discussion I also call myself a libertarian reactionary.

March
8, 2005

Ira
Katz [send him mail] teaches
mechanical engineering at Lafayette College.  He is the co-author
of Handling
Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and
Introduction
to Fluid Mechanics.

Many
people believe it is valuable to know a second language. For example,
the economy is global so this knowledge might improve one's income.
Of course knowing a second language is nice when traveling. But
knowing a second language is much more fundamental to me.

Linguists,
behaviorists, and anthropologists disagree about the precise relationship
between language and thinking, but there is no question that they
are closely linked. To speak is essentially to think, which is the
defining characteristic of our species. Therefore, to only speak
one language is to understand only one way of thinking. At least
one language beyond the native tongue should be mandatory for all
students, just as it is necessary to know how to read or count.
Thus, it is an example of the gross malpractice of educators in
the US that second language instruction typically begins with a
pathetic attempt during middle school. Languages should be a fundamental
part of all curriculums all through primary and secondary schools.
This is the common standard throughout most of the world. The failure
of US schools has been well documented at LRC. However, I do not
recall anything specific about language instruction, but I would
not be surprised if the trouble began during that wellspring of
bad thinking, the Progressive Era.

So
I believe one must know at least two languages to be considered
educated. This hole in my education has spurred me to take language
courses over the years. But these isolated courses have had little
lasting effect. To be honest, for me, learning a second language
has been the most difficult academic endeavor. I came to think an
immersion course was necessary. Also, I chose Spanish as my second
language because of the availability of classes and many opportunities
to hear the language on TV, and to practice with Spanish speakers
in the US. I love Spain too! Of course Portuguese is spoken in Brazil,
but Spanish (or something close to it) is the language of Argentina.
So I threw the proverbial dart at the Internet board and found a
small school in Cordoba, Argentina to enroll in a two-week immersion
course.

This
trip was my first visit to South America. I quickly became enchanted
with the people and the places I visited. I also was able to make
economic observations that may be of interest to LRC readers.

My
first impression of Brazil, with the exception of the plane graveyard
at the So Paulo airport, was that of a first world country, possibly
Spain or Italy. While the relaxed pace of life would imply a lack
of ambition, on the contrary, the people I met exhibited intelligence,
education, and creativity that match what I have seen in the US
or Europe. In fact, I think the Brazilians have a unique sense of
style in everything from clothing and interior design to toilets
that is beyond what is typically seen in the US. But I did not meet
the people in the vast slums called favelas, though I wanted to
visit a children's center that my friend's wife supports. And I
learned that the people I had met with the ideas and dynamism are
typically frustrated in their plans to better themselves, which
in turn limits the opportunities of the people in the favelas. The
cause of the frustration is the parasitic class who control the
state. They maintain a bureaucratic swamp whose progeny is massive
corruption. Furthermore, the elite are steeped in the socialist
or Keynesian thinking that has kept the multitudes mired in poverty
the world over. It is such a tragedy that this naturally rich country,
with so many wonderful people, should be stained with so much poverty.

Examples
of this state of affairs abound. On the side, my friend runs a gas
station. One of his employees qualified for a position with one
of the police forces. On his first day on the job his commander
told the new recruit that he was required to make a monthly payment
to him. Of course this income was supposed to be generated by fleecing
motorists or other innocent citizens. The former employee could
not bring himself to do it, so he returned to the gas station. My
friend's wife started a jewelry store with her sister. It took her
many months to obtain permission to open her shop as she refused
to pay any bribes. An American friend with connections to Brazil
had wanted to have some of his manufacturing done there. But it
was impossible for him find his way through the bureaucratic morass.
He is now having the work done in China.

Some
of the more hard-working people are driven out of the country. On
the flights to and from Brazil I sat next to young men who worked
in the US. One man could make more money making pizzas in a month
than he could working in Brazil all year. He was going back to Brazil
to check on his properties, properties he had purchased with his
saving from making those pizzas! The other gentlemen wanted to start
a shoe store outside of New York City. Most of the flight he complained
about Brazilian people as if her were an ugly American, or a New
Yorker. I had to kid him about this and told him he must maintain
a more tranquil attitude.

One
hundred years ago Argentina was in the top 10 in the wealth table
of nations. But the usual socialist and Keynesian errors have driven
Argentina into the third world, making her a poster child for Richard
Weaver's observation that "ideas have consequences." Argentina
has its own world-class corruption that has recently dovetailed
with the meddling of the International Monetary Fund in keeping
US banks profit and Argentine state solvency supported on the economic
backs of the people.

The
economy, I mean real people beyond aggregate statistics, is still
reeling from the sudden eruption of inflation in 2001. For 11 years
the peso was pegged to the US dollar. But the state was still borrowing
and the inflation was hidden from the people. Argentines falsely
believed their cash in the bank was safe and that their dollar-based
mortgages were financially sound. The Argentine inflation was not
unprecedented in amount, a 70% fall in the value of the peso, but
it was particularly bad on the psyche in how it occurred. In contrast,
the dollar lost about 40% of its value over the same 11-year period,
a period that is considered one of the very best economically in
US history. When overnight the currency went into freefall and the
government closed the banks, the people suddenly realized they had
been robbed but could do nothing to mitigate the problem. The gradual
and sudden inflations are in effect like paying protection money
and being robbed by a pickpocket, respectively. Both are morally
repugnant. But your problem is compounded when you attempt to pay
for the dinner you have already eaten and find that your wallet
is missing. Thus, many Argentines were over-committed after the
revaluation of the peso. My Spanish teacher in Cordoba, young, attractive,
educated, and bright, told me she could not make any plans for the
future. Thus, the economic crimes echo in the souls of the people.

A
case study on the economic theory of supply and demand and the interference
of the state is the prevalence of the medical house call in the
US as compared to Argentina. In the 19th century the
American Medical Association purposefully and successfully created
a cartel for the practice of medicine, thus severely limiting the
number of doctors. The 20th century saw the corporatization
of private medical insurance through the tax code, the nationalization
of military veteran's health care and medical research, and the
creation of Medicare and Medicaid. In the 21st century
we have already seen the prescription drug boondoggle foisted on
the public. LRC readers are well acquainted with this history. The
result is a fascist health care system in the US; fascist in that
production, though not totally owned by the state, is controlled
by the state. My father was a physician but passed away before he
could reap the high returns for MDs from this system. In a general
practice, he still made house calls up until his death in 1967.
Now the house call, presumably a service still desired by patients,
is extinct in the US. In Argentina, medical education is free and
newly minted physicians barely make a living wage. And house calls?
The going rate is 5 pesos, which is less than $2US!

The
economic star of South America is Chile and it is about to enter
the first world, if it has not already done so. How does Chile differentiate
itself? According to the Heritage Foundation's Freedom Index Chile
is freer than the US. My friend told me a most telling anecdote
regarding his work for an American energy company preparing a bid
for a contract in Chile. He specified to his contact in Santiago
that he must have the input of a tax attorney. His contact told
him that would be impossible. My friend was adamant; no bid could
be prepared without expert knowledge of how the taxes would affect
the profitability of the project. The best his contact could do
was to make an appointment for the top law firm. The lawyer also
explained to my friend that no tax attorneys were available. What
seems amazing to us is the reason. The taxes are so low and so simple
that there are literally no tax attorneys in Chile!

In
Brazil and Argentina what is considered clean, sanitary, in order,
and safe is much different than in the US. In other words, many
Americans would think it was dirty, unsanitary, disordered, and
dangerous. It is undoubtedly true that it is not as clean and not
as safe in Brazil as in the US. But the concern for safety in the
US has reached neurotic and totalitarian proportions. The attempt
to take all of the risk out of life, for total security and sterility,
makes life itself sterile and constrained. An example of the difference
in attitude is the warning on cigarette packages. In Brazil the
package shows the picture of a drooping ash and the warning is not
for cancer or heart disease but impotence. Now that is an example
of a different set of priorities!

While
the economic climate is not nearly as good as it could be, life
in general seems better because the most important traditional institution
has not been replaced by the state. Family life in South America
is more vibrant than in the US. It is typical for students to go
to their local university while living with their parents. When
they do move out of the house it is usually within the same city
if not down the street. Adult siblings are best friends and business
partners. The extended family of aunts, uncles, and cousins are
participants in everyday life. Thus, the financial resources of
an extended family mitigate the lack of economic opportunity. Even
more telling, retirement income and health care in old age, the
source of so much anxiety is the US, is much less of an issue because
loved ones, not bureaucrats, provide these services.

There
is much more to observe in South America than economics. The wonderful
people express the charm of a vibrant culture in a beautiful and
exotic setting. I highly recommend that you visit.

February
18, 2005

Ira
Katz [send him mail] teaches
mechanical engineering at Lafayette College.  He is the co-author
of Handling
Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and
Introduction
to Fluid Mechanics.