Return to the Free Liberal Homepage

May 15, 2008

“Who Cares About Anarchy When You Can Have Limited Government?”

A Sunday Night Social Debate * May 18, 2008 * 4:00-5:30pm at the Galaxy Hut

Presented by the Center for Liberty and Community

Jan Helfeld will argue in favor of limited government as the optimal system for achieving human happiness. Helfeld is a lawyer and businessman turned TV producer. In the last few years he has traveled the world as a lecturer and debater at numerous universities. He has produced documentaries such as “To Invade or Not Invade” about the Iraq War and other philosophical explorations such as “The Proper Function of Government”, “The Socratic Interviewing Technique”, and “The Media Against Business.” He also has hosted/produced several TV shows in Puerto Rico and Washington, DC. See a video clip of Jan’s interview with Senator Harry Reid at: http://www.freeliberal.com/blog/archives/003277.php

And in favor of anarchy…

Michael Owen is a certified gun-toting, swing-dancing anarcho-capitalist. He received his Ph.D. in 2003 from North Carolina State University in theoretical astrophysics. He is currently employed as a computational fluid dynamics engineering consultant for a small firm in Maryland. He is the husband of Congressman Ron Paul's Communications Director, Rachel Mills.

The debate will be moderated by Kevin Rollins, publisher of the The Free Liberal, the Center for Liberty and Community’s web magazine.

This debate is free and open to the public. RSVPs (to publisher[at]freeliberal.com) are appreciated but not required. Following the debate we will commence our usual social hour. Register for the event and invite friends through the Facebook page.

Galaxy Hut is located on Wilson Blvd between Danville and Edgewood Sts in Arlington, Virginia (Directly across from the Whole Foods Supermarket and a few blocks from the Clarendon Metro Stop on the Orange Line. http://www.galaxyhut.com * 2711 Wilson Blvd, Arlington, VA 22201.

Posted by KevinRollins at 11:57 AM | Comments (7)

April 19, 2007

Is Extremism a Virtue?

Some like to quote Barry Goldwater’s (infamous?) 1964 acceptance speech, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.” The key clause there was “no vice”; the question is: Is extremism virtuous?

Thanks to Darren for commenting on my blog, “It’s All Opportunism.” I feel misunderstood, however. Darren makes the responsible case for gun rights, and even concealed carry. My initial blog was less about the technicalities of those positions and more about specific reactions to the Blacksburg Massacre. It’s entirely possible that most Second Amendment advocates are responsible people, one’s who do not take extremist positions. But, some extremists have been using this tragedy to air their most aggressive views. These people chide moderate freedomistas for being “wimpy” and “namby pamby,” and, worst of all, from their perspective, “opportunists.”

The main point of my blog was to suggest to gun extremists that they were themselves engaging in opportunism to use this horrible event to make their case for guns everywhere. There is nothing inherently wrong with opportunism, in my view. In fact, being attuned to the news cycle seems an excellent way to educate and mold public opinion. I was, however, suggesting some amount of sensitivity for the families of those slain.

My personal view is reasonably pro-Second Amendment. The way I read the Constitution, citizens have the right to bear arms, nationwide, but only on a citizen’s property. And I do believe that Congress can define what “arms” are, and what they are not. I don’t believe that citizens have the right to bear bazookas, for example.

The States have the power to limit where arms are carried, in my view. Banning weapons on the public streets and universities seems a reasonable thing, as the States effectively own the roads. States also can and should restrict who may carry, based on criminal backgrounds or mental defect.

I’m skeptical that States should allow concealed carry, but that is largely a function of population density. It might be reasonable in Wyoming and unreasonable in Rhode Island. Regardless, I’d leave that to the States. That Virginia did not allow guns at Virginia Tech seems reasonable to me, even if perhaps armed students might have stopped the amount of carnage there this week.

-Robert Capozzi

Posted by RobertCapozzi at 07:21 AM | Comments (1)

Is Extremism a Virtue?

Some like to quote Barry Goldwater’s (infamous?) 1964 acceptance speech, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.” The key clause there was “no vice”; the question is: Is extremism virtuous?

Thanks to Darren for commenting on my blog, “It’s All Opportunism.” I feel misunderstood, however. Darren makes the responsible case for gun rights, and even concealed carry. My initial blog was less about the technicalities of those positions and more about specific reactions to the Blacksburg Massacre. It’s entirely possible that most Second Amendment advocates are responsible people, one’s who do not take extremist positions. But, some extremists have been using this tragedy to air their most aggressive views. These people chide moderate freedomistas for being “wimpy” and “namby pamby,” and, worst of all, from their perspective, “opportunists.”

The main point of my blog was to suggest to gun extremists that they were themselves engaging in opportunism to use this horrible event to make their case for guns everywhere. There is nothing inherently wrong with opportunism, in my view. In fact, being attuned to the news cycle seems an excellent way to educate and mold public opinion. I was, however, suggesting some amount of sensitivity for the families of those slain.

My personal view is reasonably pro-Second Amendment. The way I read the Constitution, citizens have the right to bear arms, nationwide, but only on a citizen’s property. And I do believe that Congress can define what “arms” are, and what they are not. I don’t believe that citizens have the right to bear bazookas, for example.

The States have the power to limit where arms are carried, in my view. Banning weapons on the public streets and universities seems a reasonable thing, as the States effectively own the roads. States also can and should restrict who may carry, based on criminal backgrounds or mental defect.

I’m skeptical that States should allow concealed carry, but that is largely a function of population density. It might be reasonable in Wyoming and unreasonable in Rhode Island. Regardless, I’d leave that to the States. That Virginia did not allow guns at Virginia Tech seems reasonable to me, even if perhaps armed students might have stopped the amount of carnage there this week.

-Robert Capozzi

Posted by RobertCapozzi at 07:21 AM | Comments (1)

April 18, 2007

It’s All Opportunism

I never cease to be amused when some castigate or criticize others for being “opportunistic.” There seems to be a kind of sanctimony in that judgment . . . something like “I am principled; they are opportunistic.”

Perhaps that’s so. Yet, if one is to avoid current events entirely and simply opine on what one believes are the priority issues facing our society and culture, one would not engage in the “opportunism” of commenting on things like the Virginia Tech shootings.

Yet, those who wrap themselves in the flag of “principle” can’t seem to resist suggesting that Virginia Tech, and all campuses, and everywhere, including commercial jets!, would be far safer if anyone could be packing heat. This of course assumes that everyone’s a marksman, and that these trained marksmen will stop more criminals and psychopaths than random violent acts would be, in a sense, encouraged. In other words, with more guns in public, will it be more likely that someone who would otherwise simply lose his or her temper be tempted to pull, and even use, a weapon?

It seems unknowable whether the incidence of violence would increase or decrease were firearms more commonly in public. But, regardless of the merits of the argument, I suggest such advocacy is “opportunistic.” In this case, tin-eared opportunism, in my opinion. Aside from converted gun folk, calling for more guns when the blood has yet to dry in Blacksburg comes across to many as callous. It certainly does to me.

Thinking back to my college days, I’m not real sure I’d want to go to class with another 18 year old who is carrying a weapon. Students who’ve just left the nest and are discovering who they are have a tendency to act impulsively. I recall students storming out of philosophy classes, angry at what the professor had said or what grade he or she gave a student. I could imagine pistol-brandishing incidents replacing my memories of an angry kid storming out, and, for me, that’s not a pretty picture.

So, in this case, the appropriate response to Blacksburg is to not be opportunistic. Voice one’s condolences, and resist the temptation to potentially profit politically over this tragedy.

-Robert Capozzi

Posted by RobertCapozzi at 06:09 AM | Comments (1)

October 09, 2006

"Immigration reform and its challenges" -- event this Wednesday

I'd like to invite our Free Liberal readers to join me for an event at Northern Virginia Community College-Woodbridge Campus, where my friend Eneas Biglione will be speaking.

11am in the Theater
Guest Speaker: Eneas Biglione on
“Immigration Reform and its Challenges”

Mr. Biglione is an expert in Latin American politics and economics. He is program director of the Hispanic American Center for Economic Research (HACER), as well as Latin American Senior Fellow of the Atlas Economic Research Foundation. Also, he serves as a counselor of the federal government of Mexico through the Institute for Mexicans Abroad (IMA). Mr. Biglione makes frequent appearances on television and writes a regular column for Tech Central Station, a Washington, D.C.-based Internet news service.

He will discuss the economic reasons for why people come to America, the effects of immigration, and strategies for improving the system.

If you are interested in attending, please e-mail me at kevin at kevinrollins.com to get a parking pass.


Posted by KevinRollins at 07:52 PM | Comments (0)

September 27, 2006

Robert Fuller Event at Busboys and Poets

The Liberty Coalition and the Center for Liberty and Community present:

Robert Fuller, author of All Rise: Sombodies, Nobodies and the Politics of Dignity.

This book event will take place at Busboys and Poets, 2021 14TH ST NW, on Tuesday, October 3rd from 6-7:30 PM

Please RSVP to Michael Ostrolenk, michaeldostrolenk [at ] gmail.com, if you are able to attend. And do pass this announcement along to friends and colleagues.

About the Book allrise.png

“In mid-twentieth century, after a historic national struggle, America opted to extend its democracy by de-legitimizing racism and redefining itself as a multi-cultural society. "All Rise" argues that resolving our current political crisis and regaining the respect of the world requires an evolutionary step of comparable scope--de-legitimizing rankism and building a dignitarian society. To suggest that this is not a utopian vision, but rather democracy's next natural step-and that America is up to the job is what "All Rise" is about.”

About Robert Fuller (From: www.breakingranks.net):

"After earning his Ph.D. in physics at Princeton University in 1961, Robert Fuller taught at Columbia University and co-authored the book Mathematics of Classical and Quantum Physics. The mounting social unrest of the 1960s drew his attention to educational reform, and in 1970 he was appointed president of his alma mater Oberlin College at the age of 33.

In 1974 Fuller traveled to India (as a consultant to Indira Gandhi) and there witnessed firsthand the famine resulting from the war with Pakistan over what became Bangladesh. With the election of Jimmy Carter, Fuller began a campaign to persuade the new president to end world hunger. His meeting with Carter in the Oval Office in June 1977 led to the establishment of the Presidential Commission on World Hunger.

During the 1980s, Fuller traveled frequently to the USSR, working as a citizen-scientist to improve the Cold War relationship. This work led to the creation of the non-profit global corporation Internews, which promotes democracy via free and independent media, and for many years Fuller served as its chairman.

With the collapse of the USSR, Fuller’s work as a citizen diplomat came to a close and he began reflecting on his career and came to understand that he had, at various times, been a somebody and a nobody and the cycle was continuing. His periodic sojourns in “Nobodyland” led him to identify and investigate rankism – defined as abuse of the power inherent in rank – and ultimately to write Somebodies and Nobodies: Overcoming the Abuse of Rank (New Society Publishers, 2003). His sequel, All Rise: Somebodies, Nobodies, and the Politics of Dignity (Berrett-Koehler, 2006), focuses on building a dignitarian society."

Posted by KevinRollins at 12:05 PM | Comments (0)

June 18, 2006

Right Against War with Iran

Check out this event which is occuring Wednesday. If you are in the DC-area, you should consider attending. I will try to be there myself.

-- Kevin D. Rollins


Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy Presents:

Right Against War with Iran

The speakers include:

Chuck Pena (Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy):
"Refocusing the War on Terrorism"

Ivan Eland (Independent Institute)
“The United States Might Have to Accept a Nuclear Iran.”

Phil Giraldi (former CIA officer, contributing editor, The American Conservative):
"Iran: Same Bad Intelligence, Same Catastrophic Results"

Doug Bandow (Liberty Coalition):
"Another War: Another Attack on Civil Liberties"

When: Wednesday, June 21st 2006
Where: 122 Cannon House Office Building
Washington DC
Washington, D.C. 20015
Time: 2 p.m.-3 p.m.


If you have any questions please contact Michael D. Ostrolenk, Policy Fellow, Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy
at mostrolenk@terabolic.net

The Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy is a group of scholars, policy makers and concerned citizens united by our opposition to an American empire. The Coalition is dedicated to promoting an alternative vision for American national security strategy that is consistent with American traditions and values.

Posted by KevinRollins at 07:12 PM | Comments (0)

Free-for-all (frfr-ôl) -- n. A disorderly fight, argument, or competition in which everyone present participates.

from Dictionary.com



supportus.png

If you enjoy our site or our print publication, please consider making a contribution today!


SIMPLE AD ERROR VIEW COUNT NOT UPDATED
Advertisement


Return to the Free Liberal Homepage


Subscribe to our list:


About the Free Liberal
The Free Liberal is an independent journal of transpartisan thought.

The views expressed herein are those of the writers individually and not necessarily those of the Free Liberal, the Center for Liberty and Community, or its board of directors.