Google is fighting censorship:

Google is seemingly bent on making a clean sweep of the Pacific Rim in its new anti-censorship campaign: first it refused to go on censoring its services at the behest of the Chinese government; now it has refused the Australian government’s (batshit crazy) request to censor YouTube videos that Canberra’s censor board put into its “refused classification” bucket.

Its good to remember that corporations don’t necessarily need to put profits before principle. It nice to see that Google is willing to take a potential hit in its profits to maintain its principles.

A recent study has shown that for parents to instill passion in their children its best to take a hand off approach.

The study focused on what psychologists call autonomy, the basic need to feel like you’re acting based on your own values and desires, not those of others. Controlling parents chip away at their child’s autonomy, by pushing them into a hobby, the researchers say. So when the kid picks up his clarinet it’s not out of a desire to play music, but due to a sense of obligation or a fear of disappointing his parents, according to Mageau.

If their is evidence showing that a more laissez-faire approach to parenting results in greater passion I wonder if the same kind of evidence can extend into state intervention into the individual passion of the citizens. Is one of the problems with extensive state intervention is that it kills off the passions of the citizenry?

Seems likely but then I’m biased against the state.

Arnold King asks:

The important point is that Progressives are never wrong. Top-down reform is the only way to fix the health care system. Anthropogenic global warming is scientifically proven, and its solution requires strenuous exercise of political control over individual behavior. Deficit spending is necessary and sufficient to create jobs. Technocrats can make banks too regulated to fail. Markets without technocratic control are like adolescents without adult supervision. Individual happiness can be improved by political authorities using scientific knowledge. Concentrated political power is the wave of the future, and it is good.

I am not a populist. I fear the mob. But how can I fear the Progressives any less?

Technocracy and the mob are to be equally feared.

This headers is large and unreadable. No doubt my brother will hate it. But it looks so damn good.

Triumph of style over substance. Woo Hoo!

Check it out:

When I supported indefinite detention of some terrorists during the Bush administration. However, it looks like I was write to argue in favor of indefinite detention because those in the Obama administration are also advocating for this measure.

A Justice Department-led task force has concluded that nearly 50 of the 196 detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should be held indefinitely without trial under the laws of war, according to Obama administration officials.

Clearly we have acquired terrorists that are to dangerous to free but we can’t prosecute. So long as they are non citizens and proper checks are put in place the state should be able to hold them indefinitely. Its just good to see the Obama administration agree with me and against those readers who no doubt voted for Obama but disagreed with my point.

Scott Brown beat out Coakley to break the filibuster proof majority in the US senate. How many different ways does the American people have to tell our legislators that Obamacare is to be rejected. Make no mistake about it, this election results is a referendum on this healthcare legislation.

It will be interesting to see what the Democrats next move will be.

After seeing Avatar, Mark over at Libertas et Memoria comments that he cheers for the humans in movies that pit mankind against other species.

If I see a movie and it’s aliens vs. humans, I’m rooting for the humans. Sorry, that’s just the policy of Libertas et Memoria.

I have to agree with Mark on this one which is why i was cheering for the Na’vi. You see James Cameron only bothered to write one of the species in his move as human and that was the Na’vi. So in point of fact, to cheer for the Na’va was to cheer for the humans because they were the ones written to be human. This is similar to District 9. Those creatures taken from their ship and forced to live in ghettos were written to be the humans thus i cheered for them over the monsters that looked like humans but didn’t behave like humans.

Just because the monsters in your movie look like humans doesn’t mean they are human. Its just means you weren’t interested in writing a screenplay that accurately depicts humans and instead you relied on writing humans as monsters so you could make some lame and untrue point about humanity. If you want to make a point about humanity you better take the time to actually write the humans as human otherwise your lesson about humanity is wasting my time since you are making a point about monsters and not humans.

Private property is our most fundamental right. This opinion piece reminds us its importance in fighting for civil rights.

Driving is a liberating technology, and we ought to recognize this, especially as we approach Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday.

Let’s think back to 1955, when African Americans stayed off segregated buses in Montgomery, Ala. During the year-long boycott, 325 private cars, some owned by African Americans, some by whites, some by churches, picked up people at 42 sites around the town.

Police harassed the drivers — Martin Luther King Jr. was stopped for speeding (30 in a 25-mph zone) about 30 times — but oppressing people in private cars is harder than oppressing them in public buses.

The boycott was successful, in part because of King’s fiery rhetoric, but also because of car ownership.

How would the problem of bus segregation have been resolved in the idyllic world of public transport? Obviously, the private car solution would be out.

Couldn’t blacks have set up a competing, unsegregated bus company, unfettered by oppressive regulation?

Well, they tried in Montgomery, but that required a permit. And relying on the government that oppresses you to help you become self-reliant is an iffy proposition.

Said Mayor Gayle, as he turned down their application in 1956: “If the Negroes want to ride a public vehicle, they can ride the city buses. There is an abundance of public transportation in Montgomery for those who want to use it. If there is a group of people who don’t want to use this public transportation, that’s their fault.”

Lots of people on the left like to piss on car ownership mostly because they are unable to connected the importance of car ownership to liberty.